In re Michelle G. CA5
Filed 7/29/16 In re Michelle G. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 MICHELLE G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, F071653
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 13CEJ600879-2)
v. OPINION MICHELLE G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Gary R. Orozco, Judge. Candice L. Christensen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Michael A. Canzoneri and Clifford E. Zall, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J.
Appellant Michelle G., a minor at the time of these proceedings, appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional order declaring her a ward of the court. Following a contested hearing on a petition filed under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, appellant was found to have committed the crime of driving under the influence (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)). Appellant contends the juvenile court erred during the contested hearing by failing to exclude statements allegedly made in violation of appellant’s Miranda1 rights and by admitting unauthenticated evidence. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At around 4:30 a.m. on July 5, 2014, California Highway Patrol Officers Louis Celaya and Travis Vasquez were contacted by dispatch and told to responded to a 911 call purporting to be from a young woman who had consumed too much alcohol. The officers proceeded to Chestnut Avenue, south of Annadale Avenue, looking for a white Ford parked on the side of the road with the keys possibly thrown out of the window, in order to conduct a welfare check. The location was in an unincorporated and rural area in Fresno County. Officers Celaya and Vasquez located the vehicle at the expected location and approached on foot. Both were in uniform but they had not activated the emergency lights on their car. As they approached, a set of keys was located in the roadway, directly to the left of the driver-side window. Appellant was found in the driver’s seat of the vehicle. She had red, watery eyes, slow and slurred speech, and had difficulty keeping her eyes open. She was incoherent and disoriented. An “overwhelming odor of an alcoholic beverage” was emanating from the vehicle, from appellant’s breath, and from appellant herself. When asked if she was okay, appellant responded that she was not feeling well because she had too much to drink.
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)