Skip to content
Name: People v. Hilburn (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 189
Case #: D080175
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/05/2023

Under amended Penal Code section 1170, the sentencing court’s consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors in selecting the middle term did not implicate defendant’s Sixth Amendment jury trial rights. Defendant, who was under 26 years old when he committed the underlying crimes, agreed to plead guilty to a robbery charge with a firearm enhancement in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining charges and a sentencing lid of 13 years. At sentencing, the court considered aggravating and mitigating factors, and imposed the middle term of four years for robbery and four years for the firearm enhancement, for a total of eight…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Wilford
Case #: D069888
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 06/12/2017

Under the facts of this case, defendant's sentence under Penal Code section 273.5, subdivision (f)(1) violated due process because there was no indication in the information that he faced the possibility of a sentence under this subdivision. Wilford attacked his girlfriend on multiple occasions and was convicted by a jury of two counts of corporal injury to a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)) and related offenses. As to the corporal injury counts (counts 5 and 6), the trial court found Wilford had suffered a prior assault conviction within seven years of the current offenses (Pen. Code, §…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Navarette
Case #: F069534
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/27/2016

Mexican murder conviction is not a serious felony under California law. Navarette was convicted of a number of offenses arising from a domestic incident with his ex-girlfriend. A prior serious felony enhancement and a strike prior were found true based on Navarette's 2006 murder conviction in Mexico. Navarette appealed, arguing that the Mexican offense did not include all the elements of murder in California and therefore the evidence was insufficient to support the prior serious felony enhancement and strike prior. Held: Reversed. "To qualify as a serious felony, a conviction from another jurisdiction must involve conduct that would qualify as…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Blackwell
Case #: A144424
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 09/07/2016

A trial court's determination that a minor homicide defendant is "irreparably corrupt" and deserving of a life without parole (LWOP) sentence, is not a fact that must be found by a jury. In 2007, six months before his eighteenth birthday, Blackwell attempted a residential robbery and burglary during which a resident was killed. Blackwell was convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances and sentenced to LWOP. In his first appeal, Blackwell's sentence was reversed for resentencing pursuant to the constitutional standards announced in Miller v. Alabama (2012) 132 S.Ct. 2455 (Eighth Amendment forbids mandatory LWOP for juvenile convicted of…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Sanchez
Case #: G050481
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 03/28/2016

Defendant had a constitutional right to be present in the trial court during resentencing after obtaining federal habeas relief. Sanchez was convicted of numerous offenses and originally sentenced to 63 years to life in prison. The trial court had imposed a consecutive term of one year, eight months on Sanchez's conviction for possession of a concealed stolen gun in a vehicle (count five; Pen. Code, § 25400, subd. (a)(1)), and stayed (Pen. Code, § 654) the term on his conviction for possession of a loaded gun in a vehicle (count eight; Pen. Code, § 25850, subd. (a)). After the state…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Fields
Case #: A135605
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 09/30/2014
Subsequent History: Review granted 1/14/2015: S222445

Felony punishment for oral copulation with a minor, while sexual intercourse with a minor is punishable as a misdemeanor, does not violate equal protection of the law. Defendants Fields and Griffin were convicted of numerous sexual offenses against minor females. One issue Griffin raised on appeal challenged the discrepancy between his felony sentence for oral copulation with a minor (Pen. Code, § 288a, subd. (b)(1)) and the misdemeanor punishment prescribed for sexual intercourse with a minor (§ 261.5, subd. (b)). Held: Affirmed. In People v. Hofsheier (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1185, the court held that mandatory sex offender registration (§ 290)…

View Full Summary
Name: U.S. v. Carr
Case #: 12-50082
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 08/04/2014

District court's error in imposing sentence in excess of statutory minimum based on a fact that was not supported by any jury finding was harmless. Defendants were convicted in federal court of robbing a Vons Federal Credit Union in Santa Fe Springs, California. The jury found that both defendants used and carried a firearm during the commission of a violent crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), which subjected the defendants to a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in addition to the punishment imposed for the substantive offense. The mandatory minimum increases to 10 years if the gun…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ebertowski
Case #: H039865
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/13/2014

As a term of probation, defendant may be ordered to provide his passwords to cellphones and social media websites, as well as to submit to warrantless searches. Appellant was granted probation after he pled no contest to criminal threats and resisting an officer, and admitted a gang allegation pursuant to section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1)(B). His probation terms required him to provide all passwords to electronic devices such as phones and computers, and to submit these devices to warrantless searches. He was also required to provide passwords to social media websites and submit those websites to warrantless searches. On appeal,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Martinez
Case #: E058136
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 05/28/2014

Mandatory supervision condition that requires former gang member to report to police gang unit is reasonable to ensure appellant's compliance with his release terms. Appellant pled guilty to resisting an officer (Pen. Code, § 69) and was sentenced to county prison for two years, with one year suspended and a year of mandatory supervision under terms and conditions. He claimed a term requiring him to report to the gang unit of the police is unreasonable because he is no longer a gang member, his offense was not gang related, and the condition is not calculated to prevent future criminality. Held:…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Wasbotten
Case #: E055423
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 04/03/2014

Defendant is not entitled to have a jury determine the amount of victim restitution. A jury convicted appellant of four counts of robbery. She appealed the court's restitution award to each of the victims, claiming she was entitled to have a jury determine the amount of restitution. Held: Affirmed. Appellant relied on Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 and Southern Union Co. v. United States (2012) __ U.S. __, to support her argument. But neither of these cases "have any application to direct victim restitution, because direct victim restitution is not a criminal penalty." Direct victim restitution is…

View Full Summary