In re R.B.
Filed 1/31/14 In re R.B. CA1/1
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
In re R.B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
R.B.,
Defendant and
Appellant.
A139282
(Mendocino
County
Super.
Ct. No. SCUK-JDSQ-13-1628103-002)
Minor R.B. appeals from the juvenile
court’s June
27, 2013
jurisdictional hearing. Appellant’s counsel has briefed no issues and
asks this court to review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, to determine whether it
contains any arguable issues.
file a supplemental brief with the court.
No supplemental brief has been received from appellant. Upon independent review of the record, we
conclude no arguable issues are presented for review and affirm the
judgment.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 26, 2013, at 8:00 p.m. appellant’s
parents picked her up at her friend’s house located at the “trailer court.†Appellant was sitting outside of the house on
the porch with “her friends and her peers.â€
She was “crying and really upset,†and had no shoes on. She told her parents she had been at her
boyfriend’s home where “[t]hey had pushed her up against the refrigerator.†Appellant’s parents took her in their truck to
her boyfriend’s house. As appellant was
sitting between both parents in the truck, her mother first recognized appellant
was intoxicated. When they arrived at the boyfriend’s
residence, appellant and her father became involved in an “altercation†with
the boyfriend and his brother.
Following the altercation, appellant
and her parents “went back into town†looking for “the deputies,†but could not
locate one. After driving around town
for about a half-hour looking for some deputies, they drove to the Covelo
firehouse where they found Mendocino County Sheriff’s Deputy Ricco McCoy and
another officer. Deputy McCoy recognized
appellant’s parents’ very distinctive truck parked at the firehouse. Appellant’s parents were standing outside of
the truck by the tailgate while appellant remained seated in the driver’s seat
of the vehicle turned sideways with the door open. McCoy spoke with appellant’s father who
confirmed he had called requesting law enforcement to respond because “his
daughter was drunk, he wanted her arrested and taken to juvenile hall.â€
McCoy contacted appellant to
determine if she met “the criteria to be arrested for being under the influence
of alcohol.†He immediately smelled
alcohol and observed appellant had bloodshot eyes, no shoes on, and a small
amount of blood on her shirt and her pants.
Appellant also had miscellaneous scratches on her feet, but she was
unable to “articulate†how she got them.
When McCoy asked appellant what she had to drink, she replied, “an
entire bottle of Old Crow,†which she drank herself. Appellant told McCoy it was bigger than a
pint, but could not give the deputy the exact size of the bottle.
When McCoy asked appellant to step
out of the truck so he could observe her, she fell backwards on the seat as she
attempted to exit, and the deputy had to assist her out of the vehicle. McCoy held appellant up until she gained her
balance, at which point he leaned her up against the truck because she was
having “a very difficult time.†He never
saw her stand unassisted. Appellant
refused to tell McCoy who provided her with the alcohol or with whom she was
drinking. She complied with his
directions “[a]s best as she could.†As
McCoy was speaking with appellant’s parents, she turned around and “grabbed the
truck bed with her hands facing her parents and started yelling obscenitiesâ€
and continued to yell.
Based on appellant’s inability to
tell McCoy where she was, how she got her injuries, and just her “overall
state,†the deputy concluded appellant was under the influence of alcohol to a
point where she was unable to care for her
others, and he placed her under arrest for “
drove her to meet “the Willits deputies†at a rock turnout near mile-marker No.
17. During the trip, appellant admitted
she had been drinking with her boyfriend at his house on Fairbanks, but would
not provide an address. At the turnout,
appellant had a hard time walking because she did not have on shoes and because
of her “level of intoxication.†As a
result, she was “physically helped over to the vehicle.†Appellant was transported to the hospital for
medical clearance.
A Welfare and Institutions Code
section 602 petition was filed on April 29, 2013 alleging appellant had
committed one count of being under the influence of alcohol in a public place,
a violation of Penal Code section 647, subdivision (f), a misdemeanor.
At the conclusion of the contested hearing,
defense counsel argued appellant was not guilty because she was only in a public
area because she had been “compelled [there] by the authority of her parents.†The court sustained the allegation. In rejecting appellant’s argument, the court
noted appellant had not been compelled to go to a public place by a police
officer rather there was “a level of compulsion from her parents,†but “no
state action involved.†The court also
noted appellant was at other places before the fire station, “not necessarily
compelled by her parents.â€
The court placed appellant on
probation with standard conditions and imposed four days in custody with four
days of custody credit.
The record supports the juvenile
court’s finding that appellant violated Penal Code section 647, subdivision
(f).
Penal Code section 647 provides in
pertinent part: “[E]very person who
commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a
misdemeanor: [¶] . . . [¶] (f) Who is found in any public place
under the influence of intoxicating liquor . . . in a condition that
he or she is unable to exercise care for his or her own safety or the safety of
others . . . .†(
When Officer McCoy contacted
appellant she was at the firehouse, a public place, and she was clearly
intoxicated and unable to exercise care for her own safety. Appellant had to be helped out of the truck,
she could not stand without assistance, she smelled of alcohol, her eyes were
bloodshot, she yelled obscenities at her parents, and she admitted drinking an
entire bottle of Old Crow.
We further reject the argument made
by appellant’s counsel at the jurisdictional hearing that appellant was not
guilty because she was compelled by her parents to be in a public place. We have found no case law supporting appellant’s
position. Rather, cases holding a
defendant was unlawfully compelled to be in a public place involve police
officers removing an individual involuntarily from somewhere other than a
public place after observing him or her to be under the influence of drugs or
alcohol. (See In re David W. (1981) 116 Cal.App.3d 689; also see
person who acquiesces in the police’s request to accompany the officer to a
public place cannot be found in violation of Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (f)].) Such is not the case here.
Appellant was represented ably by
counsel throughout the proceedings.
There was no dispositional error.
We have reviewed the entire record
and find no arguable issues requiring further briefing.
Accordingly, the judgment is
affirmed.
_________________________
Margulies,
Acting P.J.
We concur:
_________________________
Dondero, J.
_________________________
Becton, J.
Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
