Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Carlos D. Armour, Judge. Super. Ct. No. J226391.
HUFFMAN, J.
Following a contested jurisdictional hearing the juvenile court made a true finding on petition alleging that the minor, Trevor W., committed an assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)). The court also found the allegations of infliction of great bodily injury and personal use of a deadly weapon were true. (§ 1192.7, subds. (c)(8), (c)(23)).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.
Trevor appeals contending there is not sufficient evidence to prove that he was not acting in the defense of himself or another at the time that he used force on the victim in this case. We find there is sufficient evidence to establish that Trevor unlawfully struck the victim in the head with a wood and metal skateboard and that the trial court could find Trevor did not act reasonably in self-defense or defense of another.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
At about 6:30 p.m. on June 1, 2010, the victim in this case, Lyle Snow heard a disturbance near his house. Snow observed two teenagers, Trevor and another boy, later identified as "Gage, " yelling obscenities at passing cars. Snow saw the boys throw rocks at a neighbor's house. Both boys had skateboards.
Snow ran up to the boys and told them to stop. He accused them of throwing rocks at the neighbor's house. Snow said he was going to call the sheriff and that the boys should wait there. Snow then grabbed Gage and picked up his skateboard. Trevor still had his skateboard at the time. Snow turned his back on Trevor and started to walk to his house. Trevor then hit Snow in the back of his head with the skateboard. Snow suffered a large gash on his head, which required 16 staples to close the wound. After Trevor struck Snow, Trevor told his friend to "grab your board, let's go."
Witness Sean Quintanilla was driving by the location of the encounter between Snow and the two boys. Quintanilla did not recognize Trevor, but he did recognize Gage. He testified that he saw Snow holding a skateboard and that Snow started to walk away with the board. Quintanilla observed Gage give "like, a head sign" to Trevor. Trevor then ran up to Snow and "whack[ed] him on the back of the head" with the skateboard in a "hammer motion."
Defense
Trevor testified that he and Gage were walking on the street near Snow's house. Some kids drove by and threw a water bottle at Trevor and Gage. Gage picked up a rock and threw it, but the rock landed in the middle of the street. The boys were not riding their skateboards at the time because they were carrying them as they walked up a hill.
Trevor testified that after Gage threw the rock, Snow ran toward them and then grabbed Gage. Snow tried to grab Trevor but he was able to get away from Snow. Trevor said that Snow pushed Gage off of his skateboard and then grabbed Gage from behind. He said Snow had his hand on Gage's throat and was choking him. Trevor said he hit Snow in the head with his skateboard because he was scared for Gage and himself.
DISCUSSION
Trevor contends there is insufficient evidence to support the true finding on the charge of assault with a deadly weapon. In making his argument Trevor views the facts in the light most favorable to his case and relies on selective portions of the trial court's comments. In essence, Trevor contends there is not enough evidence in this record to overcome his defense of self-defense or defense of others. We find that applying the proper standard of review leads to the conclusion there is sufficient evidence to support the true finding.
As the parties correctly acknowledge, when we review a conviction or true finding for sufficiency of the evidence, we apply the very familiar substantial evidence standard of review. Under that standard we review the entire record, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's decision. We draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the lower court's findings. We do not make credibility decisions nor do we weigh the relative strength of competing evidence. (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576-578.) The standard of review for juvenile proceedings is the same as is used in adult criminal trials. (In re Babak S. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1077, 1088.)
Where a person relies on self-defense, or defense of others, the person must have a reasonable belief that bodily injury is about to be inflicted on the person or on another. The threat of bodily injury must be imminent and it may only be met with that amount of force as is reasonable under the circumstances. (People v. Goins (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 511, 516; People v. Minifie (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1055, 1064-1065.)
At the completion of the trial, the court made a number of observations on which Trevor bases his claim of insufficient evidence. The defense introduced evidence that Snow was a large, aggressive person who was ill-tempered, was often hostile and threatened neighbors and others. Trevor notes the court recognized that Snow was viewed by Trevor as big, ugly and mean. The court stated it believed Trevor, at least in part, and understood that Trevor probably "freaked out." The court, however, did not believe Gage was being choked, and that the court "could believe that Trevor reasonably believed that the imminent use of force was necessary to defend against that danger, " but the court also found that Trevor used more force than was reasonably necessary under the circumstances.
In light of the court's somewhat conflicting statements, Trevor argues the evidence shows he had to use the force used in this instance because Snow was "big and mean" and he did not have any reasonable alternatives. If one take those portions of the trial court's ruminations alone, there could be some merit to the argument that if Trevor reasonably feared bodily injury, he may have reasonably believed he could only use the single weapon available, the skateboard.
Although the court made some favorable statements about Trevor's possible perception of danger, the court also discussed other evidence. The court specifically stated it found Quintanilla to be credible. If the court believed Quintanilla, then it was presented with evidence that Snow was not choking Gage; that Snow was walking away with the skateboard; that Gage gave a "head" signal to Trevor; and that Trevor then ran up and hit Snow in the head with the skateboard with enough force to inflict great bodily injury. Accepting Quintanilla's version of the facts leads to the very reasonable inference that Snow did not pose an imminent threat of physical harm to anyone and whatever Trevor's perception might have been it was totally unreasonable to use deadly force. Further, Snow's testimony that Trevor said to Gage, "grab your board, let's go, " supports the inference that the blow to the head of the victim was more directed to the release of Gage's skateboard than it was to prevent harm to either of the boys.
Unfortunately the trial court's remarks mix notions of the nature of any imminent threat of harm and the use of force to repel it. However, we interpret the trial court's remarks to show the court did not believe that Trevor or Gage was in any imminent risk of bodily injury and thus the use of deadly force was unreasonable. Given the court's reliance on testimony that was contrary to Trevor's version of the facts, there was no reasonable basis for Trevor to apply the type of force used under the circumstances.
However confusing the trial court's remarks might be, it is clear the court relied on evidence that negated self-defense in this case. The court was entitled to make the credibility determination it made in this case and to give that evidence the weight it deemed appropriate. (People v. Humphrey (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1073, 1088-1089.) The evidence in this record is sufficient to support the true finding.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: McCONNELL, P. J., HALLER, J.