Appeals - challenge to certificate requirement
People v. Hodges (3rd Dist., 6/9/09, C059391) ___ Cal.App.4th ___
Penal Code section 1237.5 and Cal. Rule of Court 8.304(b) requirement of certificate of probable cause to appeal following guilty plea does not violate federal due process and equal protection rights, even if the defendant suffers from mental deficiencies, because defendants only need to ask for guidance from trial counsel. Preparing request for certificate of probable cause is part of trial counsel's duty to file notice of appeal. (People v. Ribero (1971) 4 Cal.3d 55, 66.)
Fraud - sufficiency of evidence
People v. Aldana et al. (4th Dist., , G040320) ___ Cal.App.4th ___
Evidence insufficient to support Penal Code section 424, subdivision (a)(3) convictions (prohibiting those charged with control over public moneys from keeping false accounts). Timesheets signed by supervisor did not accurately reflect employee's hours, though prosecutor admitted employee actually worked more hours than he was paid. Employee was not "officer of state ... [or] person charged with" keeping public moneys. Evidence of supervisor's guilty knowledge insufficient under "well-settled Supreme Court precedent" (People v. Salas (2006) 37 Cal.4th 196.
Ed. Note: Something's strange here. The supervisor worked 16 hours a day, seven days a week and turned a hospital around financially. The employee, a doctor, was paid only $81.88 an hour and was available to the supervisor 24 house a day, seven days a week. So why did the Riverside County DA prosecute them? Even the AG conceded the evidence of guilty knowledge was insufficient.
Racketeering - structure of the association
Boyle v. United States (U.S. Sup. Ct., 6/8/09, 07-1309) ___ U.S. ___
Instructions that told jurors they had to find existence of enterprise that is separate from pattern of racketeering activity was correct. Existence may be proved by what enterprise does, rather than abstract analysis of structure. See United States v. Turkette (1981) 452 U.S. 576.
Robbery - attempted robbery evidence insufficient
People v. Ugalino (3rd Dist., 6/9/09, C055469) ___ Cal.App.4th ___
Defendant could not be convicted of attempted robbery of person who did not have actual or constructive possession of property taken. Compare, People v. Gordon (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 519 (parents had ownership and residence of house where adult son's drugs were kept, so could be victims of robbery).
Sentencing - 78 to life not cruel or unusual
People v. Haller (3rd Dist., 6/9/09, C056282) ___ Cal.App.4th ___
Sentence of 78 years to life under Three Strikes, following multiple convictions of criminal threats, stalking, and assault upheld against challenge of cruel or unusual punishment. See People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.
Sexually violent predators - mandate to conduct psych exam
Moore v. Superior Court (2nd Dist., 6/4/09, B198550) ___ Cal.App.4th ___
As matter of constitutional due process, a defendant cannot be subjected to trial as alleged sexually violent predator while mentally incompetent. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Marcelita Haynes is mandated to order psych exam to determine if defendant is incompetent.
