Skip to content
Name: People v. Jacobo
Case #: D074887
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/02/2019

Aggravated human trafficking under a pandering theory (Pen. Code, § 236.1, subd. (b)) can be committed when only two persons are involved, i.e., the panderer and the victim, and does not require that the panderer intend to procure the victim for a third person. Defendant used a Facebook account under a fictional female persona to send "friend" requests to seven minor females urging them to become prostitutes. Four of the minors agreed to meet with a "date" who was actually defendant. He engaged in sexual acts with the minors and took sexually explicit photographs of them. He was convicted of…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Korwin
Case #: D073830
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/31/2019

For a violation of Penal Code section 288.3, subdivision (a) (contacting a minor with knowledge and intent to commit a sexual offense) the person contacted need not be a minor if the defendant believed the person was a minor. Defendant exchanged sexually explicit messages over the course of several months with a law enforcement agent who the defendant believed was a 13- or 14-year-old girl. He was arrested at a restaurant where he had arranged to meet the girl. Among other crimes, he was convicted of contacting or attempting to contact a minor with knowledge and intent…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bolding
Case #: G055187
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 05/01/2019

In a prosecution for money laundering, the People are not required to prove dollar for dollar tracing between the illegally obtained funds and the monetary transaction. Defendant, the former controller at a law firm, was convicted of eight counts of money laundering after an accountant identified a total of 524 unauthorized checks written against the firm's payroll account and made out to defendant totaling over $1 million. He appealed, arguing that the prosecution did not sufficiently prove that at least $5,000 alleged to have been laundered was derived from the proceeds of criminal activity because the money was commingled with…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Shiga
Case #: B256009
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 04/17/2019

Defendant was improperly convicted of both arson of an inhabited structure and arson of a structure under Penal Code section 451, subdivisions (b) and (c) because they are forms of the same offense of simple arson. Shiga was convicted of aggravated arson (Pen. Code, § 451.5), arson of an inhabited structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (b)), and arson of a structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (c)), among other charges, for the burning of a church and neighboring structures, causing over $3.2 million in property damage. Shiga appealed and the court addressed whether he was improperly convicted of two…

View Full Summary
Name: In re H.W.
Case #: S237415
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 03/28/2019

Criminal liability for possession of burglary tools requires a showing the defendant intended to use the instrument or tool to break into or effectuate physical entry into a structure in order to commit theft or a felony within the structure. H.W. used a pair of pliers to remove an antitheft tag from jeans in a department store and left the store without paying for the jeans. A juvenile delinquency petition was filed alleging H.W. committed theft and possession of burglary tools (Pen. Code, § 466). Following a contested jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court sustained both allegations. On appeal, H.W.…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ellis
Case #: D074710
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 01/14/2019

Penal Code section 2085.5 allows CDCR to withdraw funds from prison inmate's trust account to pay a restitution fine for a prior offense even though the inmate completed his prison term for the prior offense. Ellis was sentenced to prison in 1992 and ordered to pay a restitution fine under Penal Code section 1202.4, which qualified for garnishment under section 2085.5, subdivision (a). He completed the sentence in 1999. He was committed to prison on a new offense in 2011, and CDCR resumed deducting a portion of his prison wages under section 2085.5 based on the restitution fine…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Taggart
Case #: F073982
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/23/2019

Defendant's departure from California in violation of her "sheriff's parole" was not an escape because mere constructive custody is insufficient physical restraint to constitute the "lawful custody" required by the statute. Taggart was convicted of felony escape (Pen. Code, § 4532, subd. (b)(1)) for leaving Kern County while she was on an alternative custody program sometimes called "sheriff's parole," in violation of the parole terms. On appeal she challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support her conviction. Held: Reversed. Section 4532, subdivision (b)(1) provides, in relevant part, "Every prisoner . . . convicted of a felony . . .…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Atkins
Case #: H044999
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/30/2019

A conviction for attempting to deter an executive officer in the performance of his duties (Pen. Code, § 69) requires proof that the defendant knew the person he attempted to deter was an executive officer. A jury convicted Atkins of attempting to deter and resisting an executive officer in the performance of his duties. In response to a jury question whether the offense required proof that Atkins knew the person he attempted to deter was an executive officer, the trial court responded no. On appeal, he challenged the jury instruction and the trial court's response to the jury's question. Held:…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bedolla
Case #: H044681
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/22/2018

A violent felony allegation under Penal Code section 667, subdivision (c)(21) (a person other than an accomplice present during a burglary) does not apply to attempted first degree burglary. Bedolla and his accomplice knocked on and kicked the front door of a house, but did not enter the house. A jury convicted Bedolla of attempted first degree burglary and found true an allegation that someone other than an accomplice was present during the commission of the attempted burglary. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (c)(21).) On appeal, Bedolla argued the section 667, subdivision (c)(21) allegation must be stricken because…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. LaDuke
Case #: D072597
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 12/14/2018

The crime of vandalism of a religious educational institution includes not only acts which affect the structure of the building, but also damage to personal property located on the real property related to the building. LaDuke set fire to a sign in front of a religious university. The sign bore a crucifix and the words "John Paul the Great Catholic University." LaDuke was convicted of vandalism of a religious educational institution (Pen. Code, § 594.3, subd. (a)) and other offenses. On appeal, he argued the evidence was insufficient because the statute protects only "building[s]" and the sign was not a…

View Full Summary