Skip to content
Name: Aslam v. Superior Court
Case #: A156628
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 11/08/2019

Following defendant's successful post-trial Williamson motion to vacate his Penal Code section 115 conviction, prosecution under the more specific statute (Veh. Code, § 20) does not violate double jeopardy even though defendant was acquitted of a separate perjury count. Aslam submitted a document containing false statements to the DMV. He was convicted of offering a false document (Pen. Code, § 115, subd. (a)), but acquitted of perjury (Pen. Code, § 118, subd. (a)). After the trial, Aslam moved to vacate his section 115 conviction, arguing that under In re Williamson (1954) 43 Cal.2d 651, the prosecution was required to charge…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Linville
Case #: A140600
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 09/28/2018

The prosecution was not barred from charging defendant with murder where she previously pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to the killings because the prosecutions did not involve the same course of conduct. During the early stages of a homicide investigation, Linville pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to the killings, based on the premise that her boyfriend had committed the two murders and she got rid of a car days later to help him evade detection. Her boyfriend agreed to testify about her involvement in the murders. She also bragged to others about…

View Full Summary
Name: Hoffman v. Superior Court (Orange County)
Case #: G054414
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 11/07/2017

An information may describe multiple discrete acts, each of which constitute the charged offense, within a single count. The prosecution alleged over one hundred counts of healthcare insurance fraud (Pen. Code, § 550, subds. (a)(5), (a)(6)) against defendant. Each count identified a number of patient files and a timeframe that spanned years. The defendant's demurrer to the complaint was overruled and he petitioned for writ relief. Held: Denied. A demurrer raises a legal challenge to the sufficiency of the accusatory pleading, testing only those defects appearing on the face of the pleading. Defendant argued the prosecution may not allege multiple…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Castel
Case #: B271396
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 06/26/2017

Trial court properly overruled demurrer to parole revocation petition filed by district attorney that was not accompanied by the written report that must accompany petitions filed by supervising parole agencies. Castel was convicted of felony assault, sentenced to three years in state prison, and subsequently released on parole. In 2015, while on parole, Castel was convicted of misdemeanor criminal threats. Soon thereafter, the district attorney filed a petition seeking revocation of Castel's parole. Castel filed a demurrer to the petition, arguing that the petition was facially deficient because it was not accompanied by the written report required for petitions by…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Arroyo
Case #: G048659
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 04/28/2014
Subsequent History: Review granted 7/23/14: S219178

Prosecution of 14-year-old defendant in adult court may proceed via grand jury indictment. The Orange County Grand Jury issued an indictment that charged Arroyo and others with conspiracy to commit murder for the benefit of a gang and other offenses. (Pen. Code, §§ 187/182/186.22, subds. (a) & (b).) The indictment included a finding Arroyo was 14 years of age or older and the conspiracy offense came within Welfare and Institutions Code section 707, subdivision (d)(2). Arroyo demurred to the indictment, claiming section 707, subdivision (d) requires prosecution to proceed via preliminary hearing and information. The demurrer was sustained and the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Goldman
Case #: C069884
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/24/2014

Sex offender who failed to demur to overlapping charges regarding same victim forfeited claim on appeal. Goldman molested his nieces C. and B. over a period of several years. He was convicted of several sex offenses, including one count of lewd conduct (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a); count 1) on B. and one count of continuous sexual abuse (Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a); count 2) on B. On appeal, he contended that his conviction for count 1 had to be vacated because the time period that the information alleged overlapped with the period of time…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. McCoy
Case #: C067380
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 05/03/2013

Video testimony of quadriplegic was properly shown to jury where defendant had opportunity to cross-examine victim during the conditional examination. McCoy physically and sexually assaulted his girlfriend, Cindy H., rendering her a quadriplegic. Because Cindy was extremely ill at the time of the preliminary hearing and because her medical condition provided reasonable grounds to fear that she would be unable to testify at trial, she was examined via two-way video conference. The video was played during trial because Cindy was unable to testify. McCoy was convicted of multiple offenses and sentenced to 25 years to life in…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Breslin
Case #: A132443
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 05/16/2012

Recantation by the victim does not support a motion to withdraw plea. In exchange for a promise of probation and dismissal of other counts, appellant pled guilty to spousal abuse. Prior to sentencing, she moved to withdraw her plea, contending that it was not knowing and intelligent because, at the time she entered her plea, she was unaware that the victim would recant and it was involuntary as a result of IAC, who failed to interview the victim. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in the denial of the motion. Penal Code section 1018 provides that a defendant…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Witcraft
Case #: H036768
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/06/2011

The resolution of a first set of criminal charges, based on a course of conduct which included providing false insurance information, precluded a second prosecution for violation of Penal Code section 550 based on Penal Code section 654 and Kellett v. Superior Court (1966) 63 Cal.2d 822. The first set of charges arose following a traffic accident and included presenting false identification and false registration, possession of a stolen license plate, and failing to provide proof of insurance. Those charges were resolved by a no contest plea. Six months later, a second complaint alleged the violation of section 550 of…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Superior Court (Brooks)
Case #: B197189
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 01/18/2008

A prosecutor cannot amend the information to allege aggravating factors to secure a jury trial. Prior to Brooks's trial, the prosecutor sought to amend an information to allege 10 aggravating circumstances. The trial court sustained Brooks's demurrer to the amended information, and the prosecutor sought a writ of mandate. The appellate court denied the petition. People v. Sandoval disapproved of permitting a jury trial on aggravating circumstances in resentencing proceedings. Allowing the prosecutor to amend the information here implicated the same constitutional concerns inherent in a jury trial. Allowing a jury trial on aggravating…

View Full Summary