Youngblood

Youngblood v. Gates

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 403·200 Cal. App. 3d 1302·246 Cal. Rptr. 775
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 4, 1988B002438California40,295 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rothman, J.

In this action for injunctive and declaratory relief against a number of governmental entities and individuals in their official capacities, 1 plaintiffs allege that persons arrested in the City of Los Angeles are not being arraigned before a magistrate without “unnecessary delay” in violation of constitutional and statutory requirements. They further challenge the conditions of prearraignment confinement in city jails, including deprivation of visitation rights, reading materials, recreational opportuni *1308 ties, and proper hygiene. Finally, the complaint charged the city with inadequate identification and treatment of mentally ill arrestees.

Procedural History

On June 7, 1977, Isaac Youngblood, an indigent being held in prearraignment confinement as a result of arrest by Los Angeles police officers, together with individual taxpayers, filed a class action. Their complaint underwent several amendments. A second class action suit by other individuals raising similar issues was filed November 7, 1980. On February 9, 1981, these two actions were ordered consolidated for the purpose of trial.

A court trial began on October 25, 1982, and concluded on December 10, 1982.…

Dissenting Opinion

George, J.

I dissent. With all due deference to the detailed findings and carefully drawn conclusions rendered by the learned trial court, I must *1331 respectfully voice my disagreement with its restrictive interpretation of Penal Code section 825 and its invalidation of certain policies of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) pertaining to arrestees confined in city jail facilities. I submit that some of the rules promulgated by the majority opinion in upholding the judgment rendered by the trial court are unsupported by constitutional, statutory, or case law and will impose an onerous burden upon LAPD. 1 Without such support in the law, this court is without authority to mandate what procedures are to be used by LAPD in processing, transporting, and housing the many thousands of felony arrestees taken into custody each year by that agency.

I

Application of the Requirement in Penal Code Section 825 That An Arrestee Be Taken Before A Magistrate Without Unnecessary Delay And, in Any Event, Within Two Days After Arrest

Establishing the constitutional right to speedy trial during the time preceding a suspect’s initial court appearance, article I, section 14 of the California…

Opinion

In this action for injunctive and declaratory relief against a number of governmental entities and individuals in their official capacities, [1] plaintiffs allege that persons arrested in the City of Los Angeles are not being arraigned before a magistrate without "unnecessary delay" in violation of constitutional and statutory requirements. They further challenge the conditions of prearraignment confinement in city jails, including deprivation of visitation rights, reading materials, recreational opportunities, and proper hygiene. Finally, the complaint charged the city with inadequate identification and treatment of mentally ill arrestees.

On June 7, 1977, Isaac Youngblood, an indigent being held in prearraignment confinement as a result of arrest by Los Angeles police officers, together with individual taxpayers, filed a class action. Their complaint underwent several amendments. A second class action suit by other individuals raising similar issues was filed November 7, 1980. On February 9, 1981, these two actions were ordered consolidated for the purpose of trial.

A court trial began on October 25, 1982, and concluded on December 10, 1982. The court…

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.