- Criminal: Riverside Superior Judge Samuel Diaz’s denial of resentencing affirmed in People v. Salcido (INF062246/E079398)
- Francisco Salcido was convicted of attempted premeditated and deliberate murder of a police officer in 2011. He had shot at, and missed, Desert Hot Springs Police Sergeant Robert Ritchie on May 26, 2008. He appealed his conviction, arguing that he should find relief in Penal Code Section 1172.6. The trial court decided that the section did not apply to his case, and the Court of Appeal agreed.
- Criminal: Riverside Superior Judge Jacqueline Jackson’s sentencing affirmed in People v. Alvarez (BAF1601284/E077924)
- Ruben Diaz Alvarez Jr., was convicted of two counts of forcible rape, forcible oral copulation , attempted sodomy and assault. He appealed, arguing that one of his sentences should have been stayed, that the court should have dismissed one of his prior convictions, and that his sentence of 275 years to life plus five years violated prohibitions on cruel or unusual punishment. The Court of Appeal disagreed.
- Criminal: appeal of San Bernardino Superior Judge Harold Wilson’s denial of resentencing dismissed in People v. Magee (FSB1203948/E077903A)
- Duane Magee was convicted of killing his wife, Velda. He petitioned for his conviction to be vacated under Penal Code Section 1172.6. After failing to file a supplemental brief, the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal as abandoned.
- Family: San Bernardino Superior Judge Steven Mapes’s termination of parental rights conditionally reversed with directions in In re v.C. (J292242/E080563)
- A pair of parent’s parental rights were terminated after the homeless mother was found to have substance abuse and delivered her child early due to complications. She appealed, arguing that San Bernardino County failed to properly investigate her child’s Native American ancestry before terminating her parental rights, as required by federal law. The Court of Appeal agreed with the mother, and conditionally reversed the termination order until the child’s ancestry is investigated.
- Criminal: San Bernardino Superior Judge Shannon Faherty’s revocation of probation affirmed in People v. Alvarado (FVI21001411/E079827)
- Hector Alvarado pled guilty to one count of unlawful possession of ammunition, and was placed on probation. The court revoked his probation for failing to report to his officer over three months, and sentenced him to three years in prison. He appealed, arguing insufficient evidence that he willfully failed to report to the officer. His provided phone number did not go through to him. He said he was hospitalized for COVID, and then was homeless. He still reported to his job. The Court of Appeal found sufficient evidence that he decided not to report.
- Real estate: appeal of Riverside Superior Judge Chad Firetag’s ruling withdrawn
- Magnolia Partnership and Realm Real Estate received approval from Riverside to develop a commercial space and 450 apartments. Wilson Holdings, Los Altos XXVII and Northgate Gonzalez sued Realm Estate On the grounds that the planned project violated their easement agreement. Realm Real Estate appealed an injunction that blocked the project, but withdrew it before oral argument, resulting in the case dismissal. dismissed in Northgate Gonzalez v. Realm Real Estate (CVRI2104149/E078106)
- Criminal: appeal of San Bernardino Superior Judge Christopher Pallone’s denial of resentencing dismissed in People v. Walker (FMB006290-1/E080697)
- In 2003, Vernon Walker was found guilty of two counts of first degree murder and one count of arson after being accused of killing two fellow Marines for 10 pounds of marijuana and torching their cars with their bodies inside. He was found guilty with an accomplice, and was sentenced to two consecutive life terms without parole. He filed to be resentenced under Penal Code Section 1170.91, a 2015 law that granted judges sentencing discretion when the defendant is a veteran with certain disorders. The petition was denied, and he appealed. He did not file a supplemental brief, resulting in the case being dismissed.
- Family: Riverside Superior Judge Michael Rushton’s finding in regard to the Indian Child Welfare Act affirmed in In re A.B. (SWJ2200251/E080333)
- Parents appeal from Rushton’s ruling that the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply to their child. If it did apply, the child would be offered to the Native American tribe of their ancestry instead of being placed in foster care. The Court of Appeal ruled that the father’s Native American heritage was irrelevant, because he was not proven to be the actual father.
- Civil suit: San Bernardino Superior Judge Donald Alvarez’s restraining order affirmed in Santa Cruz v. Thomas (CIVSB2202471/E079361)
- Desiree Thomas was granted a civil harassment restraining order against his neighbor, John Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz was granted his own restraining order after alleging Thomas would trespass on his property and videotape Santa Cruz and his fiancée. Thomas appealed the order, arguing insufficient evidence. The Court of Appeal disagreed.
- Family: San Bernardino Superior Judge Lynn Poncin’s termination of parental rights affirmed in In re K.H. (J287650-3/E080575)
- Parents appeal from the termination of parental rights as to their four children. They came to county attention after the mother gave birth to a boy who tested positive for amphetamines, and reported they were homeless. They argued that their children could benefit from being in their care. The Court of Appeal disagreed, citing their history of domestic violence
- Criminal: Riverside Superior Judge John Molloy’s decision not to consider a motion to strike reversed in People v. Araoz (RIF076673/E079837)
- Javier Araoz was convicted of possession of drug paraphernalia while incarcerated in the California Rehabilitation Center. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. He moved to strike one of his prior strike convictions, and appealed when Molloy declined to consider his motion. The Court of Appeal found that Molloy should have considered the motion, but did not rule on whether the conviction should be struck.
- Family: Riverside Superior Judge Mona Nemat denied a petition for extraordinary writ in In re L.L. (RIJ1900326/E080657)
- Three children under the age of 5 years old were removed from their parents’ care after the parents brought a 1-month-old to a hospital. The child showed signs of shaken baby syndrome. Reunification services were denied after separation. The parents petitioned to overturn the denial of reunification services, arguing insufficient evidence to support the allegations of severe physical harm and severe physical abuse. The Court of Appeal disagreed.
- Criminal: San Bernardino Superior Judge Bryan Stodghill’s denial of resentencing affirmed in part, reversed in part in People v. Lampe (FVI1102893/E070676)
- Ashley Gilroy was convicted of murder, kidnapping and dissuading a witness, and was sentenced to 45 years. She had decided to murder her ex-boyfriend, Keith Wimberley, with co-defendant Tracey Lampe. Lampe was convicted of murder, kidnapping and assault. Gilroy appealed her sentence, arguing she should be resentenced under Penal Code Section 1172.6. The section reduces murder convictions for people who are convicted of murder despite not being directly responsible for the murder. The Court of Appeal reversed the murder conviction, agreeing with Gilroy’s argument that the section applied to her.
- Criminal: San Bernardino Superior Judge Mary Fuller’s denial of resentencing affirmed in People v. Thompson (RCR11884/E078600)
- Jeffrey Thompson was found guilty of the 1986 murder of a teenager, and was sentenced to 25 years to life. Two other men were convicted with him. The minor was a gas attendant who worked with Thompson. He requested to be resentenced under Penal Code Section 1172.6 in 2020. His petition was denied, and he appealed. The Court of Appeal found that Thompson acted with reckless disregard to human life, and should not be granted relief.
- Family: Riverside Superior Judge Dorothy McLaughlin’s termination of parental rights affirmed in In re M.B. (RIJ2100119/E080536)
- Children were removed from their parents’ care after Riverside County discovered that the mother had used methamphetamine during her pregnancy. She appealed the decision, arguing that the court failed to see that living with her would benefit her children. The Court of Appeal found that the parents’ failure to visit their children during separation undercut their claims that they could benefit their children’s lives.
Related Posts
Appeal rules on juvenile defendants’ transfers to criminal court, detention facility
A county judge cannot transfer a youth defendant to adult criminal court while the defendant’s appeal of the transfer is ongoing, the Fourth Appellate District of the California Court of…
Aidan McGloinDecember 26, 2024
Editor’s column: DOJ wants to know about IE civil rights violations
This fall I learned that the Inland Empire's U.S. Attorney’s Office is one of the few in the nation to have a civil rights department. On Oct. 22 the Riverside…
Toni MombergerDecember 26, 2024
