In Re Gregory S.

*770 Opinion

The Contra Costa County Juvenile Court found that appellant, a minor 15 years of age, resisted, delayed and obstructed Deputy Sheriff. R. Flores in the discharge and attempted discharge of a duty, of his office. (Pen. Code, § 148.) The minor was thus found to come within the provisions of section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and declared a ward of the juvenile court.

This appeal questions (1) the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the decision of the court, and (2) the propriety of the court’s rulings on the admissibility of certain evidence.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a brief as amicus curiae in support of appellant.

Facts

The testimony was in conflict. However, by viewing the evidence, resolving conflicts and drawing reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to respondent as required (People v. Archerd (1970) 3 Cal.3d 615, 621 [ 91 Cal.Rptr. 397 , 477 P.2d 421 ]), we find the trial court’s decision supported by the following substantial evidence.

On February 14, 1979, at 1:45 p.m., Deputy Sheriff Flores, on routine patrol, went to the Orinda residence of Mrs. Ahlstrom to investigate her complaint of “malicious…

I respectfully dissent.

While the record, arguably, demonstrates a valid basis for a temporary detention consistent with constitutional mínimums (see Brown v. Texas (1979) 443 U.S. 47, 51 [ 61 L.Ed.2d 357, 362 , 99 S.Ct. 2689 ]; In re Tony C. (1978) 21 Cal.3d 888, 893 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 366 , 582 P.2d 957 ]; and cf. People v. Michael (1955) 45 Cal.2d 751 [ 290 P.2d 852 ]) whether the challenged jurisdictional finding rested upon a “sound legal.. .[or] correct factual basis” (majority opn., ante, p. 780) is unascertainable. As the majority grudgingly recognizes, it is seriously doubtful whether a mere refusal to answer questions in a detention setting— without more—can ever furnish an adequate basis for an arrest. (See Terry v. Ohio (1967) 392 U.S. 1, 34 [ 20 L.Ed.2d 889, 913-914 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 ] (conc. opn. of White, J.); Michigan v. DeFillippo (1979) 443 U.S. 31 [ 61 L.Ed.2d 343 , 99 S.Ct. 2627 ]; Brown v. Texas, supra; cf. Norwell v. City of Cincinatti (1973) 414 U.S. 14 [ 38 L.Ed.2d 170 , 94 S.Ct. 187 ] [1st Amend, analysis].) Here, it would appear that the pivotal finding was based to an appreciable degree upon the minor’s resolute insistence to remain silent and to be let…

The Contra Costa County Juvenile Court found that appellant, a minor 15 years of age, resisted, delayed and obstructed Deputy Sheriff R. Flores in the discharge and attempted discharge of a duty of his office. (Pen. Code, § 148.) The minor was thus found to come within the provisions of section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and declared a ward of the juvenile court.

This appeal questions (1) the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the decision of the court, and (2) the propriety of the court's rulings on the admissibility of certain evidence.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a brief as amicus curiae in support of appellant.

The testimony was in conflict. However, by viewing the evidence, resolving conflicts and drawing reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to respondent as required ( People v. Archerd (1970) 3 Cal.3d 615, 621 [ 91 Cal. Rptr. 397 , 477 P.2d 421 ]), we find the trial court's decision supported by the following substantial evidence.

On February 14, 1979, at 1:45 p.m., Deputy Sheriff Flores, on routine patrol, went to the Orinda residence of Mrs. Ahlstrom to investigate her complaint of…