In re N.D. CA2/6

Filed 12/16/20 In re N.D. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

In re N.D., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B300184 Under the Juvenile Court (Super. Ct. No. PJ52991) Law. (Los Angeles County)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

N.D.,

Defendant and Appellant.

The juvenile court sustained a petition filed against N.D., finding that he committed a misdemeanor battery on a school employee. (Pen. Code, § 243.6; Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602.) Its disposition order placed N.D. on home probation for six months. N.D. contends the juvenile court abused its discretion when it excluded impeachment evidence in the form of a report made by

the complaining school employee concerning the incident. The juvenile court reviewed the report in camera, determined it was privileged, placed it under seal and declined to order its disclosure. We have reviewed the documents placed under seal by the juvenile court and affirm. FACTS Appellant attended high school in Los Angeles. Margarita Ojeda worked there as a teacher’s assistant. On May 16, 2018, Ojeda found appellant and his girlfriend in an alcove during a class period. Although both students were fully dressed, Ojeda concluded they were standing in an inappropriate position, because the girlfriend was in front of appellant with her face near his crotch, as though they were engaging in oral sex. Ojeda said, “‘Are you serious? What are you doing?’” “‘You need to be in class.’” Appellant replied, “‘We’re not doing anything.’” Ojeda repeated that they needed to be in class. Appellant and his girlfriend ignored her and walked away. Ojeda went to her supervisor’s office where she wrote up a report about the incident, as mandated by the school district. The next day, appellant confronted Ojeda when she was in her supervisor’s office. He swung open the office door, pointed at Ojeda and said in an angry tone, “‘You, it’s because of you, and you and me are going to talk later, and you are going to hear me out.’” The supervisor told appellant to leave the office. That same afternoon, Ojeda was walking down a staircase alongside another teacher’s assistant, Genesis Pallaroso. They encountered appellant walking up the same staircase on the other side of a railing. Appellant smirked when he saw Ojeda. As they reached a gap in the railing that separated the stairwell, appellant crossed over to the same side as Ojeda and bumped her