People v. Damien V.

Good Law
163 Cal. App. 4th 16·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 759·77 Cal. Rptr. 3d 107
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 2008No. G038495California3,442 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Fybel, J.

*19 Opinion

Introduction

Defendant Damien V., then 17 years of age, was alleged to have committed an act of gang-related vandalism. Defendant demurred to the petition, arguing Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (d), which provides an alternate penalty provision when the underlying offense is committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang, only applies to adult offenders, not juveniles. (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code, unless otherwise noted.) The juvenile court overruled the demurrer; defendant admitted the allegations in the petition, and then appealed.

We hold section 186.22, subdivision (d) applies to juveniles as well as adults, based on our analysis of section 186.22 as a whole and of its subdivisions, the purpose of Proposition 21 (the initiative which enacted the current version of § 186.22, subd. (d)), and the other statutes added or amended by Proposition 21. We therefore affirm.

Statement of Facts and Procedural History

On March 10, 2004, defendant was declared a ward of the juvenile court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. On February 23, 2007, the juvenile court found…

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.