In Re Luis M.

Good Law
180 Cal. App. 3d 1090·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1576·226 Cal. Rptr. 39
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 13, 1986G003890California1,499 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallin, J.

What witnesses are required to establish a prima facie case at a minor’s detention rehearing pursuant to In re Dennis H. (1971) 19 Cal.App.3d 350 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 791 ]?

Sixteen-year-old Luis M. was arrested for robbery on March 7, 1986. He appeared in custody in the juvenile court four days later and was ordered detained. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 632, 635.) Based on his request, a contested detention rehearing, pursuant to In re Dennis H., supra, 19 Cal.App.3d 350 , was scheduled for March 18, 1986. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 637.) The court ordered the district attorney “to have witnesses available” for the Dennis H. hearing, per Edsel P. v. Superior Court (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 763 [ 211 Cal.Rptr. 869 ]. No one from the district attorney’s office was in court at that time. Although the order to make witnesses available was incorporated into a written minute order it did not specify which witnesses were to be made available.

At the Dennis H. hearing, the prosecution offered the testimony of the police officer who arrested Luis. That officer interviewed the robbery victims and incorporated their statements into a police report which the prosecution offered into evidence. Luis…

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.