In Re Danny H.

People v. Danny H.

Good Law
104 Cal. App. 4th 92·128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 222·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 5103·2002 Daily Journal DAR 13846·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11833
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 6, 2002B154445California6,673 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

Danny H., a minor, appeals from the order continuing wardship (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) entered following findings that he committed misdemeanor vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a); count one), and possession of an aerosol container with intent to deface while on a public place (Pen. Code, § 594.1, subd. (e)(1); count two). He was ordered placed home on probation.

Introduction

We conclude that whether a person was on a “public place” within the meaning of Penal Code section 594.1, subdivision (e)(1), is determined by examining the totality of the facts and circumstances and, in the present case, there was sufficient evidence that Danny H. violated that subdivision, including sufficient evidence that he was on such a “public place.” We also hold that there is no need to decide Danny H.’s contention regarding Penal Code section 654, since that issue was relevant only to the calculation of a maximum theoretical period of confinement, and he was ordered placed home on probation.

Factual Summary

1. People’s Evidence.

Viewed in accordance with the usual rules on appeal (In re Dennis B. (1976) 18 Cal.3d 687, 697 [ 135 Cal.Rptr. 82 , 557 P.2d 514 ]), the evidence…

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.