In re Jose S.
D070521
| Cal. Ct. App. | Jun 21, 2017Background
- Jose S. admitted a 2002 juvenile offense (lewd and lascivious conduct; Pen. Code § 288(a)) and was adjudged a ward and placed on probation.
- In 2005, while still a ward, Jose admitted assault with a deadly weapon (stabbed a peer), and the juvenile court found a §707(b) offense; he was committed to the CYA.
- The court aggregated the 2002 and 2005 findings and imposed an aggregate commitment; Jose served time and was later released.
- In 2015 Jose petitioned under Welf. & Inst. Code §781 to seal his juvenile records and sought sealing of the 2002 record while acknowledging the 2005 offense was §707(b)-enumerated.
- The juvenile court initially tried to grant partial sealing but rescinded because the court’s record system could not seal only part of a juvenile file; ultimately the court denied sealing, concluding both petitions comprised one "case" and the §707(b) offense barred sealing under §781.
- Jose appealed, arguing (1) each petition was a separate "case" so the 2002 records could be sealed, and (2) his 2005 conviction did not fit §707(b)(14)’s "assault by any means of force likely to produce great bodily injury."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Jose) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court must treat each petition as a separate "case" for §781 sealing | Both petitions were part of one delinquency case under one case number and could be treated together; §781 bars sealing any records if a §707(b) offense exists in the case | A "case" should be limited to charges adjudicated together; the 2002 and 2005 petitions are separate cases so the 2002 record may be sealed | Court held both petitions are part of the same juvenile "case"; §707(b) offense in 2005 barred sealing under §781 |
| Whether an admission to assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code §245(a)(1)) is a §707(b)(14) offense (assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury) | Court may look to facts and effect of weapon; a deadly-weapon assault inherently involves force likely to produce great bodily injury | Jose argued his plea to assault with a deadly weapon did not admit the §707(b)(14) formulation; therefore it should not disqualify sealing | Held that assault with a deadly weapon here encompassed assault by force likely to produce great bodily injury; §707(b)(14) exclusion applied |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Jeffrey T., 140 Cal.App.4th 1015 (Cal. Ct. App.) (joinder and single-case treatment in juvenile context)
- People v. Soria, 48 Cal.4th 58 (Cal.) (definition of "case" in adult restitution context)
- In re Kasaundra D., 121 Cal.App.4th 533 (Cal. Ct. App.) (successive juvenile petitions managed as a whole for rehabilitation/extension of jurisdiction)
- In re Jonathan R., 3 Cal.App.5th 963 (Cal. Ct. App.) (assault with a deadly weapon implies force likely to produce great bodily injury)
- In re Myresheia W., 61 Cal.App.4th 734 (Cal. Ct. App.) (juvenile system’s welfare/rehabilitative focus differs from adult criminal system)
- T.N.G. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.3d 767 (Cal.) (overview of §781 sealing scheme)
- Manduley v. Superior Court, 27 Cal.4th 537 (Cal.) (context on Proposition 21 and §781 amendments)