In re Elias V.

People v. Elias V.

Good Law
188 Cal. Rptr. 3d 202·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 495·237 Cal. App. 4th 568
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 9, 2015A140263California14,264 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kline, J.

In an original wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602), appellant, Elias V., then 13 years of age, was alleged to have committed a lewd and lascivious act upon a child under the age of 14 years. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a).) Prior to and again at the time of the jurisdictional hearing, defense counsel moved to exclude inculpatory statements appellant made to the police on the ground they were involuntary and therefore inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [ 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 ] (Miranda). After a three-day hearing, the motion was denied and the petition sustained. Elias was declared a ward of the court and placed on probation in the home of his parents.

Elias claims his confession was involuntary under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as it was the product of the type of coercive interrogation techniques condemned in Miranda , which had “overborne his will.” Contending the statements were erroneously received in evidence and cannot be considered harmless, he maintains the judgment must be reversed. We agree.

FACTS

Elias and his friend Hector T. lived across the hall from one another in a four-unit apartment…

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.