Delinquency Case Law

In re Luke W. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 650 [105 Cal.Rptr.2d 905]. Court of Appeal, First District, Division 5.

The juvenile court sustained a supplemental section 602 petition alleging that a child had possessed a concealed dirk or dagger in violation of Penal Code section 12020(a)(4) (“dirk” or “dagger” is defined in section 12020(c)(24)). The child had been declared a ward of the court and placed on probation based on a petition alleging that he had possessed marijuana for sale. Four months later, a police officer saw him in the company of a man known to be on parole. The officer searched the child and found a small rectangular object. It resembled a thick credit card or a small cassette tape and contained ridges and grips. By pulling on one of the grips while holding the main portion of the card with one’s other hand, one could extract a small knife with a blade two and three-fourths inches long. The child appealed on the ground that this object is excluded from the statutory definition of a dirk or dagger. The appellate court reversed the decision of the juvenile court. Looking at the statutory language and legislative history, the appellate court interpreted Penal Code section 12020 to exclude from its definition of a dirk or dagger folding knives and pocketknives unless these types of knives are locked in the open position and ready to use. The court then examined the object in question and determined that, because the blade was contained in the casing and required two hands to extract, the object fell outside the statutory definition of a dirk or dagger. The appellate court therefore reversed the juvenile court’s decision.