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 B.M.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

April 20, 2017

In re B.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
B.M., Defendant and Appellant

          Superior Court of Ventura County, No. 2016025026, Brian Back, Judge.

Page 1293

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 1294

          COUNSEL

         Donna Ford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

         Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey and Michael J. Wise, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

         Opinion by Yegan, Acting P. J., with Perren and Tangeman, JJ., concurring.

          OPINION

          [217 Cal.Rptr.3d 297] YEGAN, Acting P. J.

          A common butter knife is designed to cut and spread butter. In the hand of a person bent on assaulting another, it may be a useful tool to inflict great bodily injury. Consistent with an express direction from the California Supreme Court ( People v. McCoy (1944) 25 Cal.2d 177, 188-189 [153 P.2d 315])

Page 1295

and time-honored rules on appeal, we conclude that the trial court's factual finding that the instant butter knife was a deadly weapon must be affirmed on appeal. To the extent that In re Brandon T. (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 1491');">191 Cal.App.4th 1491 [120 Cal.Rptr.3d 637] holds to the contrary, we respectfully disagree.

         As we shall explain, an assault with a deadly weapon is complete when the defendant, with the requisite intent, uses an object in a manner which is capable of producing great bodily injury upon the victim. Such an assault is not negated by (1) the victim's use of a shield or body armor to prevent injury; or (2) ineptness or poor aim in the use of the object; or (3) lack of success in inflicting great bodily injury.

         B.M. appeals from a juvenile court order declaring her a ward of the court and ordering her to serve 90 days in a juvenile justice facility. After a contested jurisdictional hearing, the court sustained a petition charging that appellant committed a felony assault with a deadly weapon (a knife) in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1).

         Relying on Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436');">384 U.S. 436 [16 L.Ed.2d 694, 86 S.Ct. 1602] ( Miranda ), appellant contends the juvenile court erroneously admitted statements she made to the police. She also contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the finding that the knife ...


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.