People v. Castillolopez
63 Cal. 4th 322
Cal.2016Background
- In July 2012 a San Diego officer found a multi-blade Swiss Army knife in defendant Emmanuel Castillolopez’s jacket pocket; one large blade was exposed. The prosecution’s witness said the blade was in a "locked, open position;" defense and expert testimony showed the blade could be closed by applying pressure to the back of the blade without manipulating a separate release.
- The prosecution’s weapons expert described friction/spring tension and a clicking sound, but conceded the knife could collapse under hard impact and that the Swiss Army knife functions primarily as a tool.
- The defense’s knife-seller expert testified the knife was not a locking-blade knife because no separate release had to be depressed to fold the blade closed.
- Defendant was convicted under Penal Code § 21310 (carrying a concealed dirk or dagger), sentenced with enhancements; the Court of Appeal reversed, finding insufficient evidence the blade was "locked into position" under Penal Code § 16470.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal, holding that a blade that can be closed simply by applying pressure to the back is not "locked into position" within the statutory meaning, so the knife was not a dirk or dagger under § 16470.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the exposed blade of a Swiss Army pocketknife was "locked into position" under Penal Code § 16470 | The blade was "exposed and locked" because spring tension/friction and a clicking sound secured it in the open position; many folding knives "lock" by friction | The blade was not locked because it could be closed by applying pressure to the back without depressing any release mechanism; it is a nonlocking pocketknife/tool | Held: "Locked into position" requires the blade be made fast or immobile (e.g., by a locking mechanism); a blade closeable simply by pressure is not "locked into position," so the knife is not a dirk/dagger under § 16470 |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Forrest, 67 Cal.2d 478 (discusses distinction between folding knives whose blades "lock into place" and nonlocking pocketknives)
- People v. Bain, 5 Cal.3d 839 (upheld dirk/dagger finding where a folding knife’s blade "locks in place")
- People v. Shah, 91 Cal.App.2d 716 (spring-blade with a set lock that could not be closed until released qualified as dagger)
- People v. Rubalcava, 23 Cal.4th 322 (discusses statutory evolution and interpretation of dirk/dagger provisions)
- In re George W., 68 Cal.App.4th 1208 (folding knife with a release lever that must be pressed to fold back was treated as "locked into place")