First District Panel Victories

Results: 211 - 220 of 630
1 20 21 22 23 24 63

A157819

The Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing in light of two amendments (Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) and Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.)) to Penal Code section 1170, which created a presumption in favor of the low term where the defendant experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma and those factors contributed to the commission of the offense.

A158418

The Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing in light of recent amendments (Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) to Penal Code section 1170, which limited the court’s ability to impose a sentence exceeding the middle term and created a presumption in favor of the low term where the defendant experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma and those factors contributed to the commission of the offense.

A164682

The Court found the Department failed to make the required ICWA inquiry of family members, including the grandmother who the Department had been in contact with from the outset of the dependency. In addition, the notices sent to the tribes were deficient because they did not include information about paternal relatives. The order terminating mother’s parental rights was conditionally reversed and remanded for compliance with the ICWA.

A163879

The Court of Appeal remanded the case for the trial court to reconsider appellant’s sentence in light of two amendments (Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) and Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.)) to Penal Code section 1170, which created a presumption in favor of the low term where the defendant was a youth at the time of the offense and now requires that circumstances in aggravation used to justify imposition of the upper term be found true by the jury, admitted by the defendant, or based on prior convictions evidenced by a certified record of conviction.

A161599

Because appellant proved he was not one of the assailants and specifically not the shooter by a preponderance of the evidence, and respondent articulated no other ground to affirm the murder and attempted robbery charges, the Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in denying appellant’s Penal Code section 1485.55(b) motion for a finding of factual innocence.

A162971

The Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing in light of recent amendments (Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) and Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.)) to Penal Code section 1170, which created a presumption in favor of the low term where the defendant experienced psychological, physical, or childhood trauma and those factors contributed to the commission of the offense. Here, there was evidence in the record that appellant suffered significant trauma, including losing custody of her children, experiencing homelessness, and having mental health issues, some of which was related to drug abuse.

A164435

The Court of Appeal agreed with father that the juvenile court’s order granting mother joint legal custody was in error. The court found the order was not based on evidence but on off-the-record discussions and unsworn statements of mother’s counsel regarding mother’s sobriety. The court reversed the joint legal custody order and remanded the matter for a new WIC 364 hearing.

A163270

In a case in which officers approached a parked car in a parking lot and discovered that the owner (not appellant) was on probation and subject to a search condition, the Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred by denying one of appellant’s motions to suppress because, after searching appellant and finding nothing, the police prolonged his detention, without an independent articulable suspicion of criminal conduct, for an additional 23 minutes while the officer searched the driver’s car.  

A162848

The Court of Appeal held that either appellant’s conviction for battery with serious bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (d)) or corporal injury to a spouse (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)) should be stayed under Penal Code section 654 because the record did not support a finding of any separate criminal intent or objective underlying those offenses.

A163803

Because the trial court partially denied appellant’s Penal Code section 1172.1 resentencing petition before the enactment of Assembly Bill 1540, which requires the court to apply any changes in law that reduce sentences and created a presumption in favor of resentencing when the request comes from the CDCR, the Court of Appeal remanded the matter for further proceedings in compliance with the amended legislation.