In re E.R. CA2/2

Filed 3/5/15 In re E.R. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

In re E.R., a Person Coming Under the B256229 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VJ43841)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

E.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Kevin Brown, Judge. Reversed. Bruce G. Finebaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, James W. Bilderback II, Supervising Deputy Attorney General and William N. Frank, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ******

1

E.R., a minor, attacks his adjudication for possessing a knife on school property on the grounds that the juvenile court should have suppressed the knife as the fruit of an unlawful seizure and search. We agree with E.R. that the school officials did not have reasonable grounds to search his backpack. The motion to suppress the knife found in the backpack should have been granted, and we accordingly reverse. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY E.R. is a 12-year-old male who attends a middle school in Lakewood, California. A security guard responding to a report of excessive noise found E.R. and a friend on school property after their classes for the day were over. The guard ordered them onto her golf cart so they could be taken to the principal’s office. She noted that E.R. was “extremely nervous” and repeatedly asserted that he was “going to get in trouble.” When they arrived at the principal’s office, E.R. became increasingly agitated—crying and repeatedly stating, “I know I am going to get into trouble.” Both the guard and the assistant principal asked E.R. to hand over the backpack he was carrying, but E.R. refused both requests. The assistant principal asked him to show what was in his backpack, but E.R. refused that request as well. The assistant principal then asked E.R. to empty his backpack and E.R. only partially complied. Eventually, E.R. handed over his backpack, and the assistant principal went through it and found a knife. The People filed a petition against E.R. under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging a single count of possessing a weapon on school grounds (Pen. Code, § 626.10, subd. (a)(1).) E.R. moved to suppress the knife. The court denied the motion, and E.R. thereafter admitted the offense and was placed on probation for six months. E.R. timely appeals. DISCUSSION E.R. argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because (1) the knife was the fruit of an unconstitutional detention, and (2) the assistant principal’s search of his backpack was unconstitutional. Where, as here, the facts are