P. v.Perger CA5

California Court of Appeal Sep 11, 2014 No. F067282Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court reversed the defendant's convictions for disobeying a domestic relations court order because the record lacked sufficient evidence that the defendant received proper legal notice of the order's terms as required by Penal Code section 836, subdivision (c)(2).

Issues

Whether there was sufficient evidence that the defendant received proper notice of the restraining order issued on November 7, 2012.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“As we explain, the record is devoid of evidence that appellant received the restraining order or that a peace officer told him about its provisions as statutorily mandated by section 836, subdivision (c)(2).”

“There is insufficient evidence in this record to establish that appellant was personally served with a copy of the trial court’s restraining order issued on November 7, 2012.”

“Appellant’s acknowledgment that he was aware of the existence of a restraining order is not the same as acknowledgment that he knew the terms of the restraining order.”

Filed 9/11/14 P. v.Perger 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F067282 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F12908472) v.

CAMERON ELLIOT PERGER, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Arlan L. Harrel, Judge. Patrick J. Hennessey, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Rebecca Whitfield, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Franson, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant Cameron Elliot Perger was found guilty, at the conclusion of a jury trial on May 16, 2013, of two counts of disobeying a domestic relations court order (Pen. Code, § 273.6, subd. (a), counts 9 & 10).1 Appellant was acquitted of eight other counts including: three counts of inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or a cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), one count of assault by means likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)), two counts of first degree burglary (§§ 459 & 460), and one count of dissuading a witness (§ 136.1).2 The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on probation for three years upon various terms and conditions, including that he spend 365 days in jail. Appellant was granted credit for 236 days already served. Appellant contends his convictions must be overturned because the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to constitute a violation of the restraining order as alleged in counts 9 and 10. FACTS Appellant and Brooke Clarke began dating in April 2010 and a month later began living together. From the allegations in the information and the trial testimony, they had a tumultuous relationship. On October 15, 2012, appellant and Clarke had a fight that led to appellant punching Clarke in the face. A friend of Clarke’s reported the incident to the police. On October 15, 2012, Fresno Police Officer Jason Jones was dispatched to a potential domestic violence call involving appellant and Clarke. That day, Jones called appellant after getting his telephone number from Clarke. Officer Jones informed appellant that an emergency protective order had been issued against him by a judge and

P. v.Perger CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief