Delinquency Case Law

In re Eduardo C. (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 937 [108 Cal.Rptr.2d 924]. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 4.

The juvenile court ordered a child to register with the local police department as a gang member pursuant to Penal Code section 186.30.

The child pled guilty to the crime of battery on a school ground. (Pen. Code, § 243.2(a).) The child's probation report listed four prior police contacts, including a section 186.22(a) offense. Under the title "Gang Activity," the box "Yes" was checked. Also, under the title "Analysis and Plan," the report indicated that the child's formal probation should stress "no further gang/victim contact." In sentencing the child, the juvenile court ordered the child to report to the local police agency to be fingerprinted and photographed. The child's attorney objected to the registration order. In its decision to sustain the registration order, the juvenile court relied on Proposition 21. The child appealed the registration order on various constitutional grounds, and as applied to him.

The Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the juvenile court. The appellate court asked whether the facts in the case justified an order requiring the child to register as a gang member pursuant to section 186.30. Section 186.30, added to the Penal Code Initiative Measure, Proposition 21, provides three conditions any one of which requires a person to register as a gang member: (1) a petition sustained for violation of section 186.22(a); (2) any crime where the enhancement specified in section 186.22(b) is found to be true; and (3) any crime that the court finds at the time of the sentencing disposition is gang related. In its decision, the appellate court relied on the child's probation report. The appellate court determined that, although the child's probation report contained substantial information justifying gang-related conditions placed on the child during the term of his probation, there was nothing in the record to satisfy any of the three conditions for imposing the reporting requirement of section 186.30. The appellate court noted that, although the child may have committed a violation of section 186.22(a), the disposition was unknown; thus, he did not qualify for treatment under section 186.22(b)(1). There was also no indication that the child ever suffered a sentence enhancement under section 186.22(b)(2). The appellate court therefore reversed the juvenile court's decision requiring the child to register as a gang member pursuant to section 186.30.