resources image
FDAP Victories
 Filter by Category

 Or, Search by Keyword

 Currently Displaying:

  • Category: All
  • Entries: 1 - 5 of 1896

> click here for tips on using this database and access to pre March 2005 victories

People v. Jackson, A151120 (Div. 4)
category/ies: Jurors, Misconduct
date posted: 2019-08-20
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Kyle Gee
FDAP buddy: J Bradley OConnel

The Court of Appeal remanded the matter for an evidentiary hearing because the record regarding juror misconduct was not sufficiently developed. The defendant moved for a new trial after collecting three juror declarations, which indicated the jury discussed the defendant’s failure to testify during deliberations. While the parties agreed that the jury’s discussions constituted misconduct, the record is not clear as to the scope of the misconduct and whether their discussion indicated that the jurors drew adverse inferences therefrom. Further, the record is silent as to whether the jurors were reminded that they should not to consider the defendant’s decision not to testify.

People v. Bacab-Chable, A155831 (Div. 1)
category/ies: Fee and Penalty Assessments
date posted: 2019-08-19
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Kieran Manjarrez
FDAP buddy: Jeremy Price

As part of the defendant’s plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal from the judgment “except as to any sentencing error the court may make.” The trial court sentenced the defendant under the plea agreement, except for it added a $25 administrative screening fee, which applies to individuals that are arrested and released on their own recognizance. Because there was no indication that the defendant had ever been released on his own recognizance, the Court of Appeal struck the fee.

People v. Broin, A154052 (Div. 2)
category/ies: Juror Dismissal - Refusal/Inability to Follow Law
date posted: 2019-07-31
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Shannon Chase
FDAP buddy: Jeremy Price

The trial court improperly discharged a juror during deliberations based on what it perceived to be the juror’s inability to set aside a speculative scenario he had imagined rather than evidence presented in court. However, the Court of Appeal viewed the evidence differently, agreeing with defense counsel that the juror’s comments to the trial court suggested a very real possibility that the juror was actually expressing doubt as to appellant’s guilt due to the absence of evidence. Judgment reversed.

People v. Williams, A154635 (Div. 4)
category/ies: Restraining Order
date posted: 2019-07-31
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Janice Wellborn
FDAP buddy: Richard Braucher

In a case arising from an altercation with a tow truck driver attempting to repossess appellant’s car, the Court of Appeal directed the trial court to vacate a protective order because protective orders issued pursuant to Penal Code section 136.2 are “limited to the pendency of the criminal action in which they are issued or to probation conditions,” and appellant was sentenced to state prison.

People v. Rodriguez, A154371 (Div. 2)
category/ies: Upper Term
date posted: 2019-07-26
full opinion (PDF): not available
attorney: Robert Angres
FDAP buddy: Paula Rudman

Because lewd conduct within the meaning of Penal Code section 288, subdivision (a) already has an age-range factor for the victim as an element of the offense, the trial court erred by relying on the victim’s age by itself in setting the defendant’s upper term sentence. (See Penal Code section 1170, subd. (b)). The Court of Appeal, therefore, vacated the defendant’s sentence and remanded the matter for resentencing.


Copyright © 2019 First District Appellate Project. All rights reserved