People v. A.C. (In re A.C.)

Good Law
249 Cal. Rptr. 3d 494·37 Cal. App. 5th 262
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 9, 20192d Crim. No. B292149California2,070 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

*264 A.C., a ward of the juvenile court, made statements to an in-home counselor who interpreted them as threats. The juvenile court sustained a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition and found that A.C. violated his conditions of probation by making criminal threats. ( Pen. Code, § 422, subd. (a).) 1 A.C. appeals.

We conclude that statements A.C. made to a counselor are admissible because they do not fall within the psychotherapist-patient privilege. ( Evid. Code, § 1014.) We also conclude A.C.'s statements do not violate his conditions of probation. We reverse.

FACTS

After sustaining a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition, the juvenile court placed A.C. home on probation. Probation condition 6 provided, "You must not unlawfully threaten, hit, fight with, or use physical force on any person." Probation *497 condition 14 provided, "You must not have, *265 possess or act like you possess an object you know is a dangerous or deadly weapon. You must not knowingly have or possess a replica gun."

A few months later, the People filed a notice of violation of probation, alleging, among other things, that A.C.: 1) "threatened his peers at school," 2) may be…

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.