Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re D.T.

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division

June 10, 2015

In re D.T., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
v.
v. D.T., Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, No. J252049 Lynn M. Poncin, Judge.

Page 694

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 695

COUNSEL

William G. Holzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Barry Carlton, Warren J. Williams and Teresa Torreblanca, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Page 696

OPINION

RAMIREZ P. J.

The trial court sustained a juvenile wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) after finding true the allegation that defendant and appellant D. T. (minor) assaulted a victim with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)).[1] The court deemed the offense a misdemeanor and ordered minor to be placed in his parent’s home, subject to certain probation terms.

On appeal, minor argues insufficient evidence supports the allegation that he used a deadly weapon. He therefore asks us to reduce the allegation the court found true to one for simple assault. (Pen. Code, § 240.) Because we disagree with minor about the sufficiency of the evidence, we affirm the adjudication order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Minor and the victim had been friends before the incident at issue in this appeal. Minor was 13 years old at the time of disposition. The victim was in eighth grade at the time of the incident and was 14 years old when she testified on April 30, 2014. At one point in time, minor had been allowed to visit the victim’s house, but the victim’s mother said he was no longer welcome there because he had failed to listen to her rules. Although minor and the victim used to play and joke with each other, they did not “rough play.” The victim had on occasion smacked or pushed minor in a joking manner, but she had not done so on the day of the incident that is the basis of this appeal.

On that day, the victim was trying to avoid minor and did not want to talk to him. He approached her anyway. When minor pulled at the hood on the victim’s sweater, she tried to pull away and told him to leave her alone. Instead of complying, minor retrieved a pocketknife from his pocket and, while still holding onto the victim’s clothing, opened it so she could see the blade.

Minor said, “You won’t be scared of this.” The victim responded, “If my mom was here, you wouldn’t have said that.” She was scared she would get hurt when she saw the knife and heard what minor said. Minor made no verbal response to the victim’s statement that things would be ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.