In re Enrique O. CA5

California Court of Appeal Aug 7, 2013 No. F066115Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the juvenile's adjudication for providing false information to a police officer, as the minor was lawfully detained and provided a false first name with the intent to evade identification.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain an adjudication for providing false information to a police officer under Penal Code section 148.9, subdivision (a).
Whether the minor was lawfully detained at the time he provided the false information.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The juvenile court could reasonably infer from these circumstances that appellant falsely told the officers his name was Casper in order to evade being properly identified by the officer so that he would not be arrested on his outstanding warrant.”

“Here, appellant was lawfully detained because Officer Martinez had an objectively reasonable basis for believing appellant earlier had brandished a weapon and a reasonable person in appellant’s situation would have known he was detained.”

Filed 8/7/13 In re Enrique O. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

In re ENRIQUE O., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE, F066115

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12CEJ600420-2)

v. ENRIQUE O., OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Timothy A. Kams, Judge. Kristen Owen, 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, Eric L. Christoffersen and John G. McLean, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Detjen, J.

The court adjudged appellant, Enrique O., a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) after it sustained allegations charging him with brandishing a weapon (count 1/Pen. Code, § 417, subd. (a)(1)) and providing false information to a police officer (count 2/Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)). On September 24, 2012, the court aggregated time from a previous petition, set appellant’s maximum term of confinement at 10 months, and committed him to the Juvenile Justice Center for 60 days. On appeal, appellant contends the evidence is insufficient to sustain the court’s finding that he provided false information to a police officer. We affirm. FACTS At appellant’s jurisdictional hearing Douglas Driggers testified that on the evening of August 11, 2012, he walked down the driveway of his house and noticed appellant and three other males down the street. Two of the males had stopped a couple and were harassing them while appellant and the other male continued walking down the street and stopped in front of Driggers’s house. When appellant, or the male with him, made a comment about physically assaulting and robbing the couple, Driggers told them to “take that crap and go to the park or to the mall.” During an ensuing exchange, appellant, or the male with him, said they were Eastside Fresno Bulldogs and started barking at him. Driggers told them he did not care who they were and not to do that in front of his house. Appellant then produced a knife and exhibited it in a threatening way as he took a few steps towards Driggers. Appellant told Driggers he was a Bulldog gang member and if Driggers had a problem, appellant was going to take care of it. Driggers retreated to his garage and grabbed his own knife. The other two juveniles then came to appellant’s aid. One of them took the knife from appellant and approached Driggers aggressively. Driggers told them they needed to stay off his property because he would use his knife. The juvenile with the knife passed it back to

In re Enrique O. CA5

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, F066115

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief