Skip to content
Name: People v. Huynh
Case #: G048804
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/18/2014

Trial court properly dismissed one strike allegation (Pen. Code, § 667.61, subd. (d)(1)) where prior conviction did not precede the currently charged offense. Huynh was charged with committing a forcible lewd act on a child under 14 years old (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (b)(1)) based on evidence that he molested a young relative sometime between 2002 and 2005. The information also alleged that, prior to the commission of the charged offense, Huynh suffered a conviction for violating section 288, subdivision (b). (Pen. Code, § 667.61, subds. (a), (d)(1).) The prior conviction occurred in 2008. The trial…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Abbigail A.
Case #: C074264
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/16/2014
Subsequent History: Review granted 9/10/2014: S220187

Juvenile court erred when it applied ICWA provisions to minors eligible for enrollment but not yet enrolled in the tribe. During dependency proceedings, the father of the two minors informed the juvenile court that his grandmother was Native American. Following ICWA notice, the Cherokee Nation confirmed that the minors were descendants of tribal members and were eligible for enrollment. However, the Cherokee Nation declined to intervene until father or the minors completed application forms. DHHS argued that the court did not need to apply ICWA protections because the minors were not enrolled members. The juvenile court held that it was…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Delarosarauda
Case #: B248615
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 06/20/2014

The trial court did not have authority to issue a protective order barring an appellant convicted of corporal injury to a co-habitant from having contact with his son or stepdaughter who were not victims. Appellant was convicted of corporal injury to a co-habitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)) and other offenses. At sentencing, the trial court issued a criminal protective order as to the victim and her two children for the duration of 10 years. It included a provision ordering appellant not to contact the protected parties, except through defense counsel. Appellant challenged the protective order on…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Gutierrez
Case #: S206365
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 05/05/2014

Penal Code section 190.5, subdivision (b) does not create a presumption in favor of an LWOP sentence for 16- or 17-year-old offenders who are convicted of special circumstance murder. Two 17-year-old offenders were sentenced to LWOP under section 190.5, subdivision (b). In two separate cases under review, each defendant claimed that the statute creates an unconstitutional presumption in favor of an LWOP sentence for a 16- or 17-year-old offender convicted of special circumstance murder. Held: Remanded to allow the trial courts to exercise the full scope of their sentencing authority. Section 190.5, subdivision (b) provides that the penalty for…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Scott
Case #: S211670
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 05/19/2014

Realignment sentencing is inapplicable to otherwise qualified defendant who had a state prison sentence imposed and suspended prior to October 1, 2011. In 2009, Scott pled guilty to possessing cocaine for sale and admitted a prior drug conviction on condition he be granted probation with a prison term imposed but suspended. His probation was revoked and reinstated on several occasions, culminating in revocation and termination of probation in December 2011. The suspended seven-year prison term was executed; he was ordered to serve his sentence in county jail instead of prison under the Realignment Act. This disposition was affirmed on appeal.…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Superior Court (Cervantes)
Case #: F066969
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/24/2014

Three Strikes Reform Act (Proposition 36) petitioner who was found to be "personally armed with a firearm" in the commission of his current offense (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (c)) was armed with a firearm within the meaning of the Act and disqualified from resentencing. In 1996, Cervantes was convicted of various offenses, including possessing heroin for sale. The jury found true an allegation that Cervantes was personally armed with a firearm in the commission of the offense (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (c)). "Strike" priors were found true and he was sentenced to 50 years to life under the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Osuna
Case #: F067498
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/24/2014

Third strike offender was not eligible for resentencing under the Three Strikes Reform Act (Proposition 36) because he was actually holding a handgun during the unlawful possession of that firearm. In 2010, a jury convicted Osuna of being a felon in possession of a firearm (former Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)) and obstructing a peace officer. Seven prior "strikes" were found true and he was sentenced to 25 years to life under the Three Strikes law. In 2013, he petitioned the trial court for recall of sentence and a new sentencing hearing under the Act (Pen. Code,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. A.M.
Case #: E057355
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 04/24/2014

Delinquent confined in a juvenile hall facility committed "battery by gassing" on a local detention facility employee when he spit on a probation officer at the facility. The minor was detained at the Central Valley Juvenile Detention and Assessment Center, a detention facility operated by the County Probation Department, pending a disposition hearing on a delinquency petition. During an incident at the detention center, the minor spit in the face of a probation officer. A subsequent petition alleging that the minor had committed battery by gassing (Pen. Code, § 243.9, subd. (a)), and resisting an executive officer was found to…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Marinelli
Case #: H039416
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/27/2014

A defendant convicted of attempted lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14 years (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 288, subd. (a)) is eligible for relief under Penal Code section 1203.4, subdivision (a). In 2008, appellant pled no contest to attempted lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14 years (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 288, subd. (a)) and was granted formal probation. After successfully completing probation, he filed for relief under section 1203.4, subdivision (a), which was granted. The prosecution then appealed. Held: Affirmed. Section 1203.4, subdivision (a) permits a defendant who has successfully completed probation to withdraw his…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Castillolopez
Case #: D063394
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 04/15/2014
Subsequent History: Review granted 7/30/2014: S218861

Concealed, opened Swiss Army knife is not a dirk or dagger because its blade cannot be locked into position. Police officers conducted a pat-search during a traffic stop and found appellant carrying a concealed Swiss Army knife with the blade in the open position. He was convicted of carrying a dirk or dagger (Pen. Code, § 21310) and appealed. Held: Reversed. There was no substantial evidence from which a trier of fact could conclude the knife was prohibited by the statute. Although the prosecution expert testified the knife was open and locked into place, he did not testify the blade…

View Full Summary