In re Garrett W. CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 2, 2013G046999MCalifornia775 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moore, J.

facts underlying the charge are different than those he admitted and do not fall within the scope of section 243.4, subdivision (3)(1). We affirm. I

FACTS

On May 24, 2011, the Orange County District Attorney filed a petition in the juvenile court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging minor violated section 243.4, subdivision (e)(1). Minor appeared with retained counsel on June 6, 2011, and entered a denial to the petition. Minor later filed a brief arguing his conduct did not violate the statute because his intention in touching the victim’s breasts was to get her to “back away” and thus there was no sexual abuse as required by the statute, but he apparently did not obtain a ruling on the issue. Minor eventually admitted a violation of section 243.4, subdivision (e)(1), after being advised of his constitutional rights and filing a written advisement and waiver of rights form. The form contained the following factual basis for minor’s admission: “On March 24, 2011, in Orange County, I willfully and unlawfully touched the breasts of Jane Doe against her will and for the purpose of annoying, harassing, intimidating, or inflicting discomfort on Jane Doe, as…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.