207 Cal. App. 4th 1540
Cal. Ct. App.2012Background
- Rodriguez was convicted of deterring, preventing, or resisting an officer by force and violence under §69 after fleeing from officers and injuring one officer.
- A prior prison term enhancement under §667.5(b) and a probation-violation finding in a separate case were admitted/established.
- He fled when Officer Rothermel approached and during the pursuit he threw an item over a chain-link fence.
- A second officer arrived and Rodriguez was subdued; a digital scale with methamphetamine residue was recovered.
- The defense argued the detainment lacked lawful cause, while the prosecution argued there was reasonable suspicion based on flight and surrounding circumstances.
- The trial court sentenced Rodriguez to four years in state prison and imposed various fines/restitution; on appeal, the judgment was modified to include additional court fees and a probation-revocation fine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient lawful cause to detain Rodriguez | Rodriguez | ||
| The officer lacked lawful cause to detain without more than flight alone. | Rodriguez | ||
| Flight alone should not establish reasonable suspicion to detain. | Yes; flight coupled with the toss of an item supported detention. | ||
| Whether the detention complied with reasonable suspicion standards | Rodriguez | ||
| Flight from police can indicate wrongdoing and justify detention. | Rodriguez | ||
| Flight is not per se enough to justify detention; justification insufficient. | Detention supported by reasonable suspicion due to flight and related behavior. | ||
| Whether the judgment correctly imposed mandatory fees/fines on appeal | Respondent | ||
| Mandatory court security fee and criminal-conviction assessment were not properly imposed initially. | Rodriguez | ||
| Mandatory fees/fines must be included; prior stays/assessments may be stayed. | Judgment modified to add the mandatory fees/fines; amended abstract to be prepared. | ||
| Whether a probation-revocation fine was properly imposed | Respondent | ||
| Probation-revocation fine was mandatory upon revocation. | Rodriguez | ||
| Fine should be assessed as directed by statute and case law. | Probation-revocation fine imposed as part of the amended judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Jenkins, 22 Cal.4th 900 (Cal. 2000) (legal cause for detention; engaged-in-duty element)
- People v. Dolly, 40 Cal.4th 458 (Cal. 2007) (detention legality; police must have reasonable suspicion)
- People v. Gonzalez, 51 Cal.3d 1179 (Cal. 1990) (corpus delicti includes lawfulness of victim's conduct)
- Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (U.S. 2000) (headlong flight as indicative of possible wrongdoing)
- People v. Souza, 9 Cal.4th 224 (Cal. 1994) (flight as factor in determining reasonable suspicion)