People v. Sozahdah CA2/8

Filed 4/10/23 P. v. Sozahdah CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B319642

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA093308) v.

SIDDIQA SOZAHDAH,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Terrance T. Lewis, Judge. Affirmed. Law Office of Qais Zafari and Qais Zafari for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Yun K. Lee, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_____________________________

After Respondent the People dismissed Appellant Siddiqa Sozahdah’s charge for grand theft under Penal Code section 487, subdivision (a),1 Appellant filed a petition under section 851.8 requesting a finding that she was factually innocent and an order destroying her arrest records. The trial court denied the petition. We affirm. BACKGROUND On October 13, 2020, Appellant was arrested for an outstanding warrant after Gerard Boeke filed a police report for grand theft under section 487, subdivision (a). Appellant and Boeke were in a romantic relationship and lived together in late 2019. Appellant alleges that Boeke was abusive towards her throughout their relationship. On or about January 2020, Appellant decided to move out of Boeke’s residence. Appellant hired movers to move items into a storage unit. During the move, Boeke claimed that Appellant stole his property valued at approximately $31,066.99. On November 15, 2021, the prosecution dismissed the case because Boeke did not wish to proceed due to recurrent travel expenses from Florida to Los Angeles for the preliminary hearing. Appellant filed a motion to seal and destroy arrest records pursuant to section 851.8. The motion argued that Appellant was factually innocent because she did not knowingly take Boeke’s property. Appellant claimed the movers she hired unknowingly took some of Boeke’s property, and she did not realize until she saw the items in her storage unit. Appellant claims she called and notified Boeke of the mistake, and Boeke retrieved his