CA Court of Appeal Opinions

In re Domestic Partnership of Campos & Nunoz - Pet Custody Dispute

The California Court of Appeal issued an opinion on March 5, 2026, in the case of In re Domestic Partnership of Campos & Nunoz. The court affirmed a lower court's order denying shared custody of a dog, noting errors in citing fictitious legal authorities but finding the claim forfeited. The opinion emphasizes the responsibility of courts and attorneys to verify legal citations, especially with AI-generated content.

In re N.J. - Juvenile Dependency Appeal

The California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, filed a non-precedential opinion in the case of In re N.J. The appeal concerns a juvenile court's dispositional order removing a child from her mother's custody based on allegations of sexual abuse, which the mother contends were improperly considered. The opinion addresses the mother's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and procedural due process.

In re C.R. - Termination of Parental Rights Appeal

The California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, issued an opinion in the case In re C.R. The appeal challenges an order terminating parental rights, with the court affirming the order after finding any procedural error was harmless.

People v. Doster - Criminal Appeal

The California Court of Appeal reversed a criminal conviction in People v. Doster, finding that the trial court erred in discharging a prospective juror and violated the Racial Justice Act. The case is remanded for a new trial.

People v. Carrillo - Criminal Appeal

The California Court of Appeal reversed and remanded an order denying a petition for resentencing for Joe Carrillo. The court accepted the People's concession that Carrillo, sentenced as a juvenile to the functional equivalent of life without parole, is eligible for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170(d)(1).

People v. Blake - Criminal Appeal

The California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two, filed an opinion on March 5, 2026, in the case of People v. Blake. The court affirmed the trial court's order denying the defendant's petition for resentencing under section 1172.6, finding the evidence sufficient to support the conclusion that the defendant was the actual killer.

People v. Nelson - California Court of Appeal Opinion

The California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court's denial of mental health diversion for Ryan Anthony Nelson, who was sentenced to 12 years for burglary and auto theft. The court found Nelson's mental health disorders were not significant factors in his crimes and that he was unsuitable for diversion.

People v. Tindall - Criminal Appeal

The California Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment against Christopher John Tindall, who was convicted of maintaining a place for unlawful cannabis sales and possession of cannabis for sale. Tindall appealed, arguing the trial court erred by preventing a religious exemption defense and by judicial misconduct. The appellate court disagreed with his contentions.

People v. Alvaro - Non-Precedential Opinion

The California Court of Appeal filed a non-precedential opinion in the case of People v. Alvaro. The defendant was found guilty of 10 counts arising from sexual offenses against two minors. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error.

In re Meraz - Habeas Corpus

The California Court of Appeal issued an opinion in the case of In re Meraz, concerning a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. The court addressed whether Proposition 57, which altered juvenile prosecution procedures, should have been applied retroactively to the petitioner's case, impacting his direct appeal and the effectiveness of counsel.