In re A.G. CA4/3
Filed 1/8/14 In re A.G. CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
In re A.G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, G048148 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DL043281) v. OPINION A.G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jane Shade, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed. Jan B. Norman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina and Kristen Kinnaird Chenelia, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *
INTRODUCTION A police officer observed A.G. (the minor) running across a busy street, after dark, in front of oncoming traffic. The officer attempted to stop the minor to caution him regarding his violation of Vehicle Code section 21954, subdivision (a). The minor, however, ran away. The minor was eventually detained, and a petition was filed in the juvenile court, alleging that the minor had resisted arrest, in violation of Penal Code section 148, subdivision (a)(1). The juvenile court found the allegation to be true, declared the minor to be a ward of the court, and placed him on probation. On appeal, the minor argues there was insufficient evidence he resisted arrest. He argues the officer was not lawfully engaged in the performance of his duties when he attempted to stop the minor. We reject the minor’s argument. The record contains sufficient evidence that the officer witnessed the minor violating Vehicle Code section 21954, subdivision (a), by failing to yield the right-of-way to vehicles near enough to be an immediate hazard. Therefore, the juvenile court’s order is affirmed.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)