Holt v. Alvarado CA5

California Court of Appeal Dec 20, 2024 No. F085357Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment because the appellant failed to provide an adequate record on appeal to demonstrate error, and his subsequent motion to augment the record was untimely and procedurally deficient.

Issues

Whether an appellant's failure to provide an adequate record on appeal requires affirmance of the trial court's judgment.
Whether the appellate court should grant a motion to augment the record filed over 300 days late after the appellant had already filed his opening brief.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because Holt has failed to include any of the necessary documents in the record for us to review, we affirm.”

“It is a fundamental rule of appellate procedure that the appellant in a case is responsible for providing an adequate record on appeal, since the burden is on the appellant to show the trial court’s decision was erroneous.”

“Holt has failed to affirmatively demonstrate any error occurred, and thus the trial court’s order is affirmed.”

Filed 12/20/24 Holt v. Alvarado CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

CALVIN HOLT, F085357 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 19C-0135) v.

M. ALVARADO et al., OPINION Defendants and Respondents.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Melissa R. D’Morias, Judge. Calvin Holt, in propria persona, for Plaintiff and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Monica N. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, Neah Huynh, Oliver C. Wu and Juliet Lompa, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Respondents. -ooOoo-

* Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Franson, J. and Peña, J.

INTRODUCTION In this case, appellant Calvin Holt, an inmate housed at Salinas Valley State Prison, seemingly alleged he was subjected to multiple rules violations reports (RVRs) related to the same incident in which he refused to accept a new cellmate. Holt claimed this was a form of unlawful “stacking.” The trial court sustained a demurrer with leave to amend, and then following Holt’s amendment, sustained a second demurrer without further leave to amend. Because Holt has failed to include any of the necessary documents in the record for us to review, we affirm. BACKGROUND The specific factual allegations of the complaint are largely irrelevant to this matter’s resolution and are, in fact, unknown, since the record on appeal does not contain the original complaint, the first amended complaint (FAC), or the second amended complaint (SAC). We gather from the briefing Holt generally claimed respondents M. Alvarado, A. Shaw, S. Sherman, and M. Owens inappropriately “stacked” multiple RVRs related to the same incident. It is unclear what type of relief he sought, since he also acknowledges he was granted at least partial relief through the internal appeals process at the prison which agreed some of the RVRs constituted impermissible stacking. The original complaint in this matter was filed on March 19, 2019. It was removed to federal court on July 5, 2019, before ultimately being remanded to Kings County Superior Court on May 12, 2021. A demurrer to the FAC—which had apparently been filed while the case was in federal court—was filed on June 11, 2021. After several extensions of time, Holt filed an opposition on November 1, 2021, and on January 12, 2022, the trial court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend. The grounds on which the court sustained the demurrer are unknown, as none of the orders sustaining either demurrer are included in the record before us. The SAC was filed on February 8, 2022. A demurrer to the SAC was filed on March 30, 2022, and after numerous further extensions, the court sustained the demurrer to the SAC on October 21, 2022, again for

Holt v. Alvarado CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief