In Re Steven S.

People v. Steven S.

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 546·25 Cal. App. 4th 598·31 Cal. Rptr. 2d 644·31 Cal. Rptr. 644·94 Daily Journal DAR 8155
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 2, 1994A060848California5,464 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

I. Introduction

This appeal challenges the constitutionality of a statute making it a crime to burn a cross on the private property of another for the purpose of terrorizing the owner or occupant or in reckless disregard of that risk. We uphold the statute, concluding it is neither overbroad nor vague, is not an impermissible content-based prohibition on speech, and does not violate equal protection.

II. Facts and Procedure

Steven S. participated in an incident of cross burning involving two sets of neighbors—the Fosters and the Hepburns—in the Humboldt County town of Manila.

Ernest Foster is African-American. His wife, Leanna Foster, is White. They lived next door to Jerry and Tina Hepburn, a fence separating their houses. The Fosters and Hepburns were on good terms; they occasionally socialized and babysat for each others’ children.

On the afternoon of September 13, 1991, which was a Friday, the Hep-bums had four visitors: Ed Pratt, John Branson, 16-year-old Steven S., and another teenager named Steven C. Someone suggested playing a Friday the 13th joke on the Fosters. The two teenagers—with assistance from the Hepburns’ six-year-old son Buck—filled a paper bag…

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.