People v. Carlos B.

California Court of Appeal Nov 3, 1999 No. C029474Published

Before: Raye

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that while a receiving county improperly refused a juvenile case transfer, the original court retained jurisdiction because transfer is discretionary and the minor waived the issue by failing to object. Additionally, the court ordered a stay on the subordinate term for possession of methamphetamine.

Issues

Did the Yolo County Juvenile Court lack jurisdiction to commit the minor to the California Youth Authority after a failed transfer to Tulare County?
Did the minor waive his challenge to the Yolo County Juvenile Court's jurisdiction by failing to object to the return of the case?
Does Penal Code section 654 require staying the term for possession of methamphetamine?

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The receiving court may not reject the case.”

“jurisdiction is not dependent upon a determination of residency. Rather, residency is simply one factor in determining whether to transfer the case for disposition.”

“The minor’s failure to challenge either the Tulare County Juvenile Court’s refusal to accept the case or the Yolo County Juvenile Court’s disposition of the matter constitutes acquiescence in those decisions.”

Synopsis

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

Opinion

RAYE, J.

The Yolo County Juvenile Court sustained charges against the minor, Carlos B., of transportation of methamphetamine for sale between

[52]

noncontiguous counties (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (b)) and possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378). Following an unsuccessful attempt to transfer the disposition hearing to Tulare County, the Yolo County Juvenile Court committed the minor to the California Youth Authority (CYA).

On appeal, the minor contends (1) the evidence is insufficient to establish he knowingly possessed and transported methamphetamine, (2) his commitment to CYA by Yolo County must be set aside and the matter remanded to Tulare County for disposition, (3) assuming Yolo County had jurisdiction for disposition of the case, the court abused its discretion in committing him to CYA, and (4) section 654 of the Penal Code requires staying the term imposed for possession of methamphetamine. Only the minor’s fourth contention has merit.

Facts

California Highway Patrol Officer Jerry Smith stopped an Oldsmobile for speeding on Interstate 5 in Yolo County. The minor and driver, one Julio Cesar, were the only occupants of the car. Smith went to the passenger’s side of the vehicle and informed the occupants why he had stopped them. Neither had a driver’s license. The minor told Smith he was going to Oregon to visit his family and that they had come from Woodlake, which was near Fresno. As they spoke, Smith, a veteran of over 20 years and knowledgeable in the field of drugs, noticed a strong odor of methamphetamine in the car and called for backup.

Officer Bronson arrived with Rocky, a canine trained in narcotics detection. Rocky alerted to the right front door and Smith opened it. Rocky then alerted to a soft-sided ice chest, big enough to hold a six-pack of soda, located on the floorboard of the passenger seat where the minor had been sitting. Inside the ice chest Smith found seven plastic sandwich bags which, in all, contained over five pounds of methamphetamine. Oil dripped from one of the bags, indicating it had not been properly dried. The leaking oil coupled with its quantity and the length of time it had been in the vehicle accounted for the strong odor.

People v. Carlos B.

AI Brief

Synopsis

RAYE, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief