In re Edward B.
Filed 9/4/13 In re Edward B. CA2/8
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
EIGHT
In re EDWARD B., a Person
Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
B243533
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
EDWARD B.,
Defendant and Appellant.
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. KJ36914)
APPEAL from
an order of the Superior Court
of
County.
Phyllis Shibata, Judge.
Affirmed.
Alexander
L. Griggs, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Kamala D.
Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General,
Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and
Kimberley J. Baker-Guillemet, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
_______________________________
The juvenile
court sustained a petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) alleging
Edward B. committed the misdemeanor offense of violating the terms of a
restraining order. On appeal, Edward
contends the juvenile court erred in sustaining the petition because there was
no stay-away provision in the restraining order. We affirm the order.
FACTUAL AND
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On September 2, 2011, the Los Angeles Superior
Court issued a restraining order against Edward to protect K.F. and K.F.’s
family.
filed a petition alleging that Edward disobeyed the court order in violation of
Penal Code 166, subdivision (a)(4).
name="_ftnref2" title="">[2] At the adjudication, the juvenile court sustained
the petition, declared Edward a ward of the juvenile court and ordered him
placed home on probation. Edward filed a
timely notice of appeal.
The Incident
K.F. and his family live in the same condominium
complex as Edward. On September 4, 2011, K.F. was riding his scooter next to a park in the
complex. Edward was sitting on a bench
in the park. K.F. rode by the park about
three times. K.F. heard Edward say
he was going to call 9-1-1. Edward then started running after K.F. K.F. rode faster to avoid being caught by
Edward. K.F. then saw his neighbor, and
yelled for help.
Grettalynn Navarette was working in her yard when she
heard some commotion. Navarette heard
her neighbor, K.F., crying out for his mother and asking for help. She stepped outside the gate of her
condominium unit and saw K.F., whom she described as “frantic†and a “nervous
wreck.†K.F. was crying and said, “Eddie
was doing it again.†Approximately one
hundred feet away from K.F., Navarette saw Edward being taken down the walkway
by his brother. He was physically trying
to escape his brother’s grasp. Navarette
heard Edward say, “I’m gonna get you, you fuckin’ B.â€
The Defense Case
Laurie Lund is Edward’s neighbor. Her daughter, Natalie, is Edward’s
friend. On the day of the incident,
Lund observed Edward and Natalie spending time together. Lund testified that Edward and
Natalie walked around the backside of the condominium to avoid seeing K.F. and
his family in the front. Lund observed Natalie, Edward,
and Edward’s mother walking outside at the same time K.F. walked out of his
condominium unit. Lund “knew that this was not
going to be a good situation.†Lund also observed K.F.’s father
talking on his phone and the police arrived seven minutes later. Lund did not see Edward being
carried away by his brother. She also
did not hear Edward screaming profanities or K.F. yelling for help.
Maryann Mayer is Edward’s legal guardian. Mayer testified that after coming home from
church, Edward and Natalie made plans to play together. Natalie’s mother called Mayer to warn her
that K.F. and his family were out looking for Edward. Mayer decided to stay with Edward the whole
time he was outside. Edward and Natalie
went to play at Natalie’s house for 20 to 30 minutes while Mayer remained
outside. During that time, Mayer
testified that she saw K.F.’s father drive his car by the park several times
while looking at her. She also saw
K.F.’s mother walk her dog past the park four times. After Edward and Natalie returned to the
park, Mayer tried to convince the children to move to a different location away
from K.F.’s family. However, Natalie
wanted to stay close by because she was waiting for her mother to call her for
dinner. While sitting in the park, Mayer
saw K.F. riding his scooter and then saw him stop and stare at Edward. Edward immediately began to dial 9-1-1 because he felt K.F. was harassing him. Mayer urged Edward not to call 9-1-1 because it was not an emergency.
As Mayer and Edward were walking Natalie back to her
home, Natalie’s mother motioned for the pair to walk in another direction
because a group of neighbors had gathered on the sidewalk “to witness
something.†Mayer then put her arm
around Edward and tried to lead him home.
Edward became upset because he wanted to continue playing with
Natalie. Edward then called Mayer a
“bitch†and became more aggravated.
Mayer knew she could not get Edward home on her own, so she called his
older brother, Bryan, to help. When Edward
saw Bryan approaching, he took off running to avoid being
restrained. Bryan caught up to Edward and
picked him up. Edward kicked and
screamed obscenities most of the way home.
After Edward agreed to stop struggling, Bryan put him down and the pair
walked the rest of the way home.
When they arrived home, Mayer gave Edward his medication two hours
later than usual. He calmed down soon
after.
After going to dinner and running errands, Mayer and
Edward returned home. The police came to
the condominium that night and talked to Edward about the incident. The police talked to Mayer and Edward on the
patio and then asked Mayer to bring Edward to the police station for further
questioning.
The People’s Rebuttal
Officer Richard Martinez is a patrol
officer for the Azusa Police Department.
Officer Martinez responded to the condominium complex on the night of
the incident. Upon arrival, Officer
Martinez first talked to K.F. and his family before going to talk to Mayer and
Edward. Mayer told Officer Martinez that
Edward had chased after K.F.
She made no mention of K.F. or his family bothering her or staring
at Edward. Officer Martinez testified
that he had previously responded to the location numerous times due to
incidents involving Edward. Officer
Martinez was able to tell that Edward had mental disabilities. On the day in question, Edward told Officer
Martinez that he got upset after Mayer told him not to call the police and that
he decided to run after K.F. because he did not like being told what to
do. Edward indicated that he knew he was
not supposed to be chasing K.F.
The Defense’s Surrebuttal
Edward testified on his own
behalf. On the date of the incident,
Edward was at the park with Mayer when he saw K.F. ride his scooter back and
forth three times. K.F. was
approximately 40 feet away from Edward.
After riding by the third time, K.F. was looking at Edward, which Edward
perceived as harassment. Edward then
said, “I’m gonna call the cops†to Mayer.
Mayer told Edward it was not necessary to call the police and the two
argued for a few minutes. Edward decided
he wanted to go to Natalie’s house and started running in that direction. K.F. saw Edward coming around the corner and
started riding faster towards his house and cried, “Mom. Mom. Mom.†Edward’s brother then came and picked him
up. The two struggled and Edward called
his brother a “bitch.†Edward agreed to
calm down and walked the rest of the way home by himself. Edward denied ever yelling at K.F. He also denied telling Officer Martinez that
he chased K.F. Edward admitted that he
was aware of the restraining order and knew he should not be having any contact
with K.F.
The court sustained the petition
DISCUSSION
Appellant contends that there was insufficient
evidence to find that he knowingly violated the restraining order because there
was no “stay-away†provision in the restraining order. We disagree.
“The same
standard governs review of the sufficiency of evidence in adult criminal cases and juvenile cases: we review the
whole record in the light most favorable to the judgment to decide whether substantial evidence supports the
conviction, so that a reasonable fact finder could find guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. [Citations.]†(In
re Matthew A. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 537, 540.) The same standard of review applies to the
review of circumstantial evidence. (
1138.) We must accept logical
inferences that the trier of fact might have drawn from the circumstantial
evidence. (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 396.) “We do not reweigh the evidence or exercise
independent judgment, but merely determine if there are sufficient facts to
support the findings of the trial court.â€
(In re Matthew S. (1988) 201
Cal.App.3d 315, 321.) “ ‘ “If
the evidence so viewed is sufficient as a matter of law, the judgment must be
affirmed. . . .†’ â€
(In re Rocco M. (1991) 1
Cal.App.4th 814, 820.)
Section 166,
subdivision (a), provides that a criminal contempt of court includes
a “[w]illful disobedience of the terms as written of any process or court
order or out-of-state court order, lawfully issued by a court, including orders
pending trial.†(§ 166, subd.
(a)(4).) “For there to be a violation of this section, there
must be proof that: the court order was made; the defendant had knowledge of
the order; the defendant possessed the ability to comply; and that the
defendant disobeyed the order.†(
Cal.App.3d Supp.1, 4.)
Edward
contends only that there is insufficient evidence that he disobeyed the terms
of the restraining order. He argues that because the restraining order
had no proximity prohibition, he could not have violated its terms. Not so.
The
restraining order prohibited Edward from: “[h]arass[ing], attack[ing],
strik[ing], threaten[ing], assault[ing] (sexually or otherwise), hit[ing],
follow[ing], stalk[ing], destroy[ing] personal property, keep[ing] under
surveillance, or block[ing]†K.F. (or A.F., V.F., and J.F.).
Even though
there was no provision in the restraining order that required Edward to stay a
specified number of yards away from K.F., he still violated its terms. Edward admitted he chased after K.F., knowing
he prohibited from doing so. He screamed
profanities and said, “I’m going to get you, you fuckin’ B.†This is sufficient evidence of violating the
terms of the restraining order which prohibited threats, stalking, and
harassment of K.F.
DISPOSITION
The juvenile
court’s order is affirmed.
BIGELOW,
P. J.
We concur:
RUBIN,
J.
GRIMES, J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] Minor does not challenge the validity of the civil
harassment restraining order.
name="_ftn2" title="">[2]
to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.
