NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

It appears that Steven A. Fuller moved against his step-father, Mr. Thelsey L. Fuller, in the various court cases to secure half of all of  Thelsey's assets....

In June 2006, Steven filed a petition for conservatorship of Edwina and her estate. Edwina had lived with him since 1999, and before that time, she lived at the Belhaven property. 

The court appointed him conservator of her and her estate in February 2007. 

In May 2008, Steven filed a petition to determine title to real property in the conservatorship action. 

The petition alleged that in 1968, while still married to Edwina, Thelsey took community property funds and purchased the 12th Avenue property with Odessa. 

Odessa quit claimed her interest in the 12th Avenue property to Thelsey before her death in 2003. 

Steven was seeking a determination that a one-half interest in title to the 12th Avenue property was vested in him.... 

He also wanted the court to determine that he held a one-half interest in title to the Belhaven property....

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/B241450.PDF

It must be noted that Daniel Kristof Lak - #216983 the former attorney for Mr. Thelsey L. Fuller has been disbarred for various violations of California Rules of Court.

Daniel Kristof Lak made several fatal errors in his representation of Mr. Thelsey L. Fuller and in the several documents he prepared on behalf of his clients.

Ten complaints are currently pending against the former attorney.

Steven also savaged the Estate of Edwina Fuller and refused to share any of those proceeds with his siblings.

We regress, Steven and his attorney Teddie J. Randall got a way with it and the Court signed off on it.

This is too much

PENAL CODE 
SECTION 503-515 

503.  Embezzlement is the fraudulent appropriation of property by a
person to whom it has been intrusted.

504.  Every officer of this state, or of any county, city, city and
county, or other municipal corporation or subdivision thereof, and
every deputy, clerk, or servant of that officer, and every officer,
director, trustee, clerk, servant, or agent of any association,
society, or corporation (public or private), who fraudulently
appropriates to any use or purpose not in the due and lawful
execution of that person's trust, any property in his or her
possession or under his or her control by virtue of that trust, or
secretes it with a fraudulent intent to appropriate it to that use or
purpose, is guilty of embezzlement.

504a.  Every person who shall fraudulently remove, conceal or
dispose of any goods, chattels or effects, leased or let to him by
any instrument in writing, or any personal property or effects of
another in his possession, under a contract of purchase not yet
fulfilled, and any person in possession of such goods, chattels, or
effects knowing them to be subject to such lease or contract of
purchase who shall so remove, conceal or dispose of the same with
intent to injure or defraud the lessor or owner thereof, is guilty of
embezzlement.

504b.  Where under the terms of a security agreement, as defined in
paragraph (74) of subdivision (a) of Section 9102 of the Commercial
Code, the debtor has the right to sell the property covered thereby
and is to account to the secured party for, and pay to the secured
party the indebtedness secured by the security agreement from, the
proceeds of the sale of any of the property, and where the debtor,
having sold the property covered by the security agreement and having
received the proceeds of the sale, willfully and wrongfully, and
with the intent to defraud, fails to pay to the secured party the
amounts due under the security agreement, or the proceeds of the
sale, whichever is the lesser amount, and appropriates the money to
his or her own use, the debtor shall be guilty of embezzlement and
shall be punishable as provided in Section 514.

505.  Every carrier or other person having under his control
personal property for the purpose of transportation for hire, who
fraudulently appropriates it to any use or purpose inconsistent with
the safe keeping of such property and its transportation according to
his trust, is guilty of embezzlement, whether he has broken the
package in which such property is contained, or has otherwise
separated the items thereof, or not.

506.  Every trustee, banker, merchant, broker, attorney, agent,
assignee in trust, executor, administrator, or collector, or person
otherwise intrusted with or having in his control property for the
use of any other person, who fraudulently appropriates it to any use
or purpose not in the due and lawful execution of his trust, or
secretes it with a fraudulent intent to appropriate it to such use or
purpose, and any contractor who appropriates money paid to him for
any use or purpose, other than for that which he received it, is
guilty of embezzlement, and the payment of laborers and materialmen
for work performed or material furnished in the performance of any
contract is hereby declared to be the use and purpose to which the
contract price of such contract, or any part thereof, received by the
contractor shall be applied.

506a.  Any person who, acting as collector, or acting in any
capacity in or about a business conducted for the collection of
accounts or debts owing by another person, and who violates Section
506 of the Penal Code, shall be deemed to be an agent or person as
defined in Section 506, and subject for a violation of Section 506,
to be prosecuted, tried, and punished in accordance therewith and
with law; and "collector" means every such person who collects, or
who has in his or her possession or under his or her control property
or money for the use of any other person, whether in his or her own
name and mixed with his or her own property or money, or otherwise,
or whether he or she has any interest, direct or indirect, in or to
such property or money, or any portion thereof, and who fraudulently
appropriates to his or her own use, or the use of any person other
than the true owner, or person entitled thereto, or secretes that
property or money, or any portion thereof, or interest therein not
his or her own, with a fraudulent intent to appropriate it to any use
or purpose not in the due and lawful execution of his or her trust.

506b.  Any person who violates Section 2985.3 or 2985.4 of the Civil
Code, relating to real property sales contracts, is guilty of a
public offense punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in a the county jail not
exceeding one year, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of
Section 1170, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

507.  Every person intrusted with any property as bailee, tenant, or
lodger, or with any power of attorney for the sale or transfer
thereof, who fraudulently converts the same or the proceeds thereof
to his own use, or secretes it or them with a fraudulent intent to
convert to his own use, is guilty of embezzlement.

508.  Every clerk, agent, or servant of any person who fraudulently
appropriates to his own use, or secretes with a fraudulent intent to
appropriate to his own use, any property of another which has come
into his control or care by virtue of his employment as such clerk,
agent, or servant, is guilty of embezzlement.

509.  A distinct act of taking is not necessary to constitute
embezzlement.

510.  Any evidence of debt, negotiable by delivery only, and
actually executed, is the subject of embezzlement, whether it has
been delivered or issued as a valid instrument or not.

511.  Upon any indictment for embezzlement, it is a sufficient
defense that the property was appropriated openly and avowedly, and
under a claim of title preferred in good faith, even though such
claim is untenable. But this provision does not excuse the unlawful
retention of the property of another to offset or pay demands held
against him.

512.  The fact that the accused intended to restore the property
embezzled, is no ground of defense or mitigation of punishment, if it
has not been restored before an information has been laid before a
magistrate, or an indictment found by a grand jury, charging the
commission of the offense.

513.  Whenever, prior to an information laid before a magistrate, or
an indictment found by a grand jury, charging the commission of
embezzlement, the person accused voluntarily and actually restores or
tenders restoration of the property alleged to have been embezzled,
or any part thereof, such fact is not a ground of defense, but it
authorizes the court to mitigate punishment, in its discretion.

514.  Every person guilty of embezzlement is punishable in the
manner prescribed for theft of property of the value or kind
embezzled; and where the property embezzled is an evidence of debt or
right of action, the sum due upon it or secured to be paid by it
must be taken as its value; if the embezzlement or defalcation is of
the public funds of the United States, or of this state, or of any
county or municipality within this state, the offense is a felony,
and is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison; and the person
so convicted is ineligible thereafter to any office of honor, trust,
or profit in this state.

515.  Upon conviction of a felony violation under this chapter, the
fact that the victim was an elder or dependent person, as defined in
Section 288, shall be considered a circumstance in aggravation when
imposing a term under subdivision (b) of Section 1170.


California Penal Code Section 503-515

Missing $107,692.30

FRAUD

Senior scams: Financial elder abuse rampant and grossly underreported, prosecutors say

With 10,000 baby boomers turning 65 every day in the United States, Baker says the problem is only going to get worse.

"We have what can really only be described as a 'silver tsunami' coming in this state with so many people retiring," Baker said. "They're vibrant and wonderful contributing members of our community, but they're also the No. 1 target for predators in fraud and financial crimes."

Among those were Jean Phyllis Jones, of Pleasanton, who was suffering from dementia when former Pinole police commander Matthew Messier walked into her life. Within weeks of befriending Jones, Messier, according to authorities, tricked her into signing over her $1.5 million, century-old Victorian estate.

"To be cheated was devastating, and it made her decline even more," said Heidi Bailey, one of two neighbors who reported the case to authorities.

Messier eventually pleaded no contest to one felony count of lying on his bankruptcy filings and received five years probation. He served about two months in County Jail and was required to reimburse Jones for the legal fees but never admitted to defrauding her. Jones died in January at 84.

Former Alameda County Superior Court judge Paul Seeman was charged in 2013 in connection with stealing more than $200,000 from his elderly neighbor Anne Nutting, who died in 2010. Seeman, prosecutors said, befriended Nutting, obtained power of attorney and pilfered from her accounts. Seeman pleaded no contest to felony counts of financial elder abuse and perjury, but as part of a deal with prosecutors, he was given time served. He was disbarred and removed from the bench, forced to pay restitution to Nutting's estate and received five years probation.

Last year, Alameda County prosecuted about 415 cases of elder abuse, most of them embezzlement, fraud and identity theft, according to District Attorney Nancy O'Malley. In many cases, O'Malley said, a younger stranger will befriend the elderly person, gain their trust, and then steal behind their backs.

Read the entire article:

Financial elder abuse rampant 

As an aside prosecution is a joke.

Misappropriation [Embezzlement] of Estate Assets - $107,692.30

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

In Re the Estate of EDWINA FULLER CASE NO. BP 135381


It is alleged that $107,692.30 was misappropriated from the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller by Steven A. Fuller with the assistance of Atty. Teddie J. Randall.

Edwina J. Fuller passed away on 02 June 2012, her conservatorship ended upon her death and thus became "the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller" and subject to California Probate Code.

$107,692.30 was paid to the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller on 29 September 2014 by Atty. Tala R. Davis in her capacity as Successor Trustee of the Thelsey L. Fuller Trust and from the Estate of Thelsey L. Fuller [LASC Case# BP 122 665] by Comerica Bank check #000250402 to Mr. Steven A. Fuller. 

No accounting has been made to the court in regards to the $107,692.30 received by Mr. Steven A. Fuller in connection with the court cases:

LASC Case# BP 099 211 Fuller, Edwina - Conservatorship 

LASC Case# BP 135 381 Fuller, Edwina - Decedent

Click on image to enlarge

But, instead those monies have been excluded from any accounting filed by Atty. Teddie J. Randall and his client Mr. Steven A. Fuller with the court in regards to the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller and or the cases cited above.



That these monies were taken without being reported to the court, without the consent of the court and without the oversight of the court constitutes fraud and financial elder abuse against the beneficiaries of the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller.

Shirley Ritchey, daughter
Sandra Arnold, daughter
Robert Fuller, son
Doris Fuller, daughter

That those monies have been embezzled and fraudulently converted is a violation of statutory law.

It is further alleged that Steven A. Fuller owes each beneficiary $21,538.46, their portion of the $107,692.30 paid to the Estate of Edwina J. Fuller by the Estate of Thelsey L. Fuller. That California Probate Law should have been applied by the court before any monies were distributed or confiscated by Steven A. Fuller and or any of his attorneys.

FIRST AND FINAL ACCOUNT AND REPORT OF ADMINISTRATOR; PETITION FOR APPROVAL OF DISBURSEMENTS; PETITION FOR STATUTORY FEES AND COMMISSIONS; FOR EXTRAORDINARY FEES; AND FOR FINAL DISTRIBUTION [PROBATE CODE 10900-1100, 10954] 

Set for hearing 16 June 2015, 8:30 AM, Department 5, The Honorable Maria E. Stratton

More to come, watch this space.*

*Objections to the accounting were filed 04/17/2015.

CASE NO. BP122665 FULLER TRUST 13 FEB 2014 DEPT. 11 10:00 am

[Abuse of Thelsey L. Fuller (Edwina)]

Re: REPLY TO RESPONSE AND DECLARATION OF SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE TO PETITION COMPELLING TRUSTEE TO ACCOUNT AND TO REFRAIN FROM DISTRIBUTING TRUST ASSETS PENDING APPEAL

The ALLEDGED family member residing at the 8625 12th Avenue, Inglewood, California property is the daughter of one of the Abusers, Doris Fuller AKA Doris Fuller Stewart (“Doris”), Ijnanya Fuller (“Ijnanya”).  We do not hold creditable Mr. Oldman’s assertion that Doris’s daughter, Ijnanya, would withhold paperwork from her mother regarding the Inglewood Property while in litigation.  Therefore, the assertion that “neither” Doris nor Robert (Abusers) “were aware of the notice to quit” until this week is on its face - false and only serves to mask a primitive attempt to mislead the Court.
       
The Court found that the July 1, 2008 transfer of $235,152.28 from Thelsey L. Fuller (one of their victims) to the Abusers, Robert Fuller (Robert) and Doris “was caused by undue influence and against Thelsey L. Fuller.”

The Court also found that the September 16, 2008 amendment to the Thelsey S. (sic) Fuller Revocable Trust (Trust) dated July 23, 2008 was the result of undue influence and fraud on the part of Robert Fuller and Doris Fuller and against Thelsey L. Fuller (Thelsey).

In addition, the Court ruled that the very “acts” of Robert and Doris constituted ELDER FINANCIAL ABUSE, UNDUE INFLUENCE AND FRAUD against Thelsey L. Fuller.

UPON ADMITTING THELSEY INTO PACIFIC PALMS CONVELESCANT HOSPITAL ROBERT SIGNED PAPER WORK INDICATING THAT THELSEY SUFFERED FROM DIMINISHED CAPACITY. THIS WAS MERE DAYS AFTER ROBERT AND DORIS DROVE THELSEY TO THE BANK AND REMOVED THE MAJORITY OF THELSY’S MONEY FROM THE CITIBANK ACCOUNT. THELSEY ALSO HAD AN ACCOUNT WITH WELLS FARGO. THELSEY’S RETIREMENT PROCEEDS WERE PROMPTLY REMOVED FROM THE CITIBANK ACCOUNT EVERY MONTH JUST AS SOON AS THEY WERE ELECTRONICALLY DEPOSITED. THELSEY’S SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS, PROCEEDS OF WHICH ARE UNACCOUNTED FOR TO THIS DAY.

It is our belief that ROBERT AND DORIS are also guilty of financial elder abuse against “Edwina Fuller,” (Edwina) Thelsey’s wife, by removing all the retirement funds out of Thelsey’s bank accounts.  The Court ordered that the Trust when controlled by Robert to turn over $ $107,692.30 to Edwina as her portion of Thelsey’s retirement.

Doris states in one of her declarations that she often cooked for Edwina.  According to all of Edwina’s caregivers when asked, they do not recall Robert or Doris visiting Edwina to visit let alone cook.  When Robert and Doris did come over it was to remove Thelsey from Steven Fuller’s (Steven) home in July of 2008 while Steven was at work. It is believed that this was done to prevent the Court from having the impression that Thelsey and Edwina, high school sweethearts, husband and wife had reconciled.  If Thelsey and Edwina had reconciled, that would mean that there would be less money for them at the time of eithers death.  Therefore, we believe that Robert and Doris separated them in an attempt to acquire the entire estate. Which is exactly what they did, though Edwina was still living.  Thelsey and Edwina were still married and beginning to hold hands and laugh together again.  Because of this it would be much more difficult for Robert and Doris to manipulate Thelsey into signing over all the assets to them.  Which is exactly and most expeditiously what they did once Thelsey was removed from the home of Steven and Edwina Fuller.  During his time in the home Thelsey acknowledged that Edwina was his wife.

A lot of testimony from Robert and Doris during the trial was not true, THEY PERJURED THEMSELVES.

After removing Thelsey from the home during the next year Robert and Doris would not allow family members to visit. If family, Sandra Arnold (Sandra) and Shirley Ritchey (Carol) were allowed in Doris’s home to visit their father, Thelsey, they were forced to endure extended periods of time waiting on the porch to get in.  Once allowed inside Sandra and Carol were not allowed to visit with Thelsey alone. Thelsey was never allowed to go on outings with them. WHEN ANYONE WOULD TELEPHONE TO SPEAK TO THELSEY THE CALL WAS PLACED ON SPEAKERPHONE. These disgraceful acts are signs of elder abuse.

Just days after Robert and Doris removed the large sum of $235,152.28 from Thelsey’s Citibank account, they dumped him at Pacific Palms Convalescent Hospital in Long Beach, CA against his will and refused to tell their siblings and other family members where he was located until AFTER his death. Over the course of his later years Thelsey always had made it abundantly clear that he did not want to be placed in a convalescent facility. Thelsey had over $400,000.00.

After reviewing Thelsey Fuller’s medical records, it is our belief that Robert and Doris physically neglected him by allowing him to lay in his excrement and body fluids for long hours.  This is the only explanation for him having two III Stage Decubitus Ulcers and one IV Stage Decubitus Ulcer in the middle of his buttock area. Thelsey’s medical conditions were observed and noted by Dr. Vu upon Thelsy entering the facility. Dr. Vu also noted that Thelsey, could benefit from medical treatment to alleviate some of his suffering and Kaiser would pay for it, Robert refused to allow Dr. Vu to treat these conditions.  Dr. Vu noted all of this in the medical record.  Robert’s refusal to allow Thelsey to be treated may have expedited Thelsey’s death, minimally it caused Thelsey more suffering.

It was noted on the medical record that the facility contacted Doris and asked that someone come to visit him because he was experiencing a mental decline.  Doris and Robert noted on his chart that he was to receive no visitors other than them and that Thelsey was not to be resuscitated. These disgraceful and immoral acts had to have caused great emotional strain to Thelsey L. Fuller, left to die without the love of family or treatment for his medical condition.

Thelsey died alone, broke and confused…believing that he had been betrayed and abandoned by his family.

We will live with this memory for the rest of our lives.

THEREFORE, the Court must enforce the Judgment After Trial conformed on March 19, 2012 as stated:

“The trustee of the Fuller Trust shall recover $235,158.28 from ROBERT FULLER and DORIS FULLER aka DORIS FULLER STEWART as individuals for which amounts ROBERT FULLER and DORIS FULLER aka DORIS FULLER STEWART shall be jointly and severally liable.”

06 NOVEMBER 2010

ELDER ABUSE, WHO DIDN'T I TELL?

http://benamarine.blogspot.com/2010/11/commitment-to-daddy.html

[THE ABUSERS ARE STILL AT LARGE]

California Court of Appeal Case Notification for: B241452

The following transaction has occurred in:

Conservatorship of Edwina Fuller v. Fuller et al.
Case: B241452 2nd District, Division p

Date (YYYY-MM-DD):  2012-10-05
Event Description:  Record on appeal filed. 
Notes:  
C-1, R-1 

For more information on this case, go to:
http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=2015255&q=303486&f=546087288

Defendants, Robert L. Fuller and Doris A. Fuller appeals
were dismissed by the Court on 08/25/2012 per rule 8.140(b).

As to the defendant’s motion for reinstatement the defendants
have a history of using delaying tactics in order to prevent
these cases against them from coming to a timely conclusion.

Their attorney, Daniel K. Lak has asked for and received 
continuance after continuance after continuance with the 
Superior Court, has a history of not filing documents with
the Court in a timely manner, erroneously filling paperwork
or not filling all of it as in this case.  

Daniel K. Lak filed Notice of Appeal and notified the 
Plaintiffs via the US Postal Service when he very well knew
Plaintiffs were represented by Council.  

Defendants, Robert L. Fuller and Doris A. Fuller aka Doris 
Fuller-Stewart were ordered in Los Angeles Superior Court
to pay all of Plaintiffs’ attorney fees, which they have 
failed to perform.  

Robert L. Fuller and Doris A. Fuller-Stewart were also
ordered to turn over all Trust assets to the Court Trustee,
Attorney Patrick J. Barnitt, which they have also failed 
to perform in direct violation of the decision rendered
by the lower Court.

But, instead turned over a Trust asset, the real estate
located at 8625 S. 12th Avenue, Inglewood, CA. 90305 
to an unknown entity in direct defiance of the lower 
Court’s order.
 
The defendants, Robert L. Fuller and Doris A. Fuller were
also ordered to pay Conservatee Edwina J. Fuller in excess
of $107,000.00 which they have failed to perform. 

I also understand and am led to believe that the defendants,
Robert L. Fuller and Doris A. Fuller are under investigation
by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in reference
to the possible filing of criminal charges in association
with their elder abuse, fraud, undue influence and financial
elder abuse.

In regards to Appeal Case B241452, the Conservatorship of
Edwina J. Fuller v. Fuller et al., LASC BP099211, attorney
Daniel Lak improperly served the Notice of Appeal to the
wrong opposing attorney.

Atty. Sandra Anderson left the case a very long time ago
as the attorney for the Conservatee Mrs. Edwina J. Fuller
and was replaced by Attorney Sybil Burrell which Mr. Lak
is or should have reasonably been aware of when he filed
his clients Notice of Appeal.  

Therefore, the defendants Appeal should be denied with 
prejudice and remanded to the lower court as I believe
that the defendants and their attorney are making a 
mockery of the Court with their frivolous assertions.

See also: B241450

PVP Attorney's Report