People v. T.K. (In re T.K.)
| Decision Date | 27 September 2021 |
| Docket Number | B309054 |
| Parties | In re T.K., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. T.K., Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County No. NJ30152, John C. Lawson II, Judge. Affirmed.
Elana Goldstein, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr. and John Yang, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Juvenile T.K.[1] appeals from the juvenile court's order sustaining a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602[2] petition finding he committed assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(4).
T.K argues the juvenile court's questioning of witnesses during the bench trial was prejudicial misconduct. We disagree. The juvenile court's questioning was measured and designed to clarify events portrayed on a grainy cellular phone video, which shows multiple minors punching or kicking the victim while hurling derogatory insults.
T.K also contends there was insufficient evidence to support the judgment and that his self-defense or defense-of-others claim was improperly rejected. T.K.'s assertion that he needed to defend himself or his friends is contradicted by the victim, his own testimony, and the video. The juvenile court is exclusively entrusted with assessing witness credibility and was well within its province to reject T.K.'s assertions.
Accordingly we affirm.
On February 10, 2020, Jared L., [3] a student at California State University, Long Beach, was riding his bicycle home from school when he encountered T.K. and a large group of other minors who were also riding on a narrow bike path. As Jared L. struggled to get past the group, he was harassed and eventually slapped by one of them.
Jared L. turned around, rode up to the minor who slapped him, and bumped his own bicycle into that person's bicycle saying, “You don't hit people.” When Jared L. thereafter tried to continue his journey home, a member of the group rammed into his bicycle from behind, knocking him to the ground.
Once on the ground, a group of approximately eight minors surrounded Jared L. One of them said, “Why are you messing around with my homie?” Jared L. replied, “Your homie just hit me.” Another member of the group then punched Jared L.
As more of the group began attacking him, Jared L. began flailing his arms in defense. T.K. then grabbed Jared L. by the backpack and threw him to the ground.
The minors then beat and kicked Jared L. At some point, they asked where his wallet was. The minors then threw Jared L.'s bicycle into the adjacent riverbed. During the attack, someone struck Jared L.'s head with a glass bottle, leaving glass in his hair and cut wounds.
City of Seal Beach Police Department Officer Benjamin Jaispream responded that day. He spoke with Jared L. and took photographs of injuries to his face, left arm, and left leg. Nearby, Officer Jaispream found a broken beer bottle on the rocks next to the riverbed.
T.K. testified on his own behalf. After the assault began, T.K. said he took out his phone to record since he wanted to post the fight to social media. “[T]his is going to be a cool clip for my edit or whatever, ” he testified.
Once he saw Jared L. pushed to the ground, T.K. testified he began to back away, but Jared L. pulled on T.K.'s arm with one hand, and on T.K.'s shirt collar with the other. Jared L. then punched T.K. on the left side of his body. The punch caused T.K. to fall down the embankment.
T.K. then ascended the embankment and observed Jared L. being attacked by the other minors, “[his] friends.” T.K. walked up to Jared L. and “push[ed]” him one more time because he was punching his friends. T.K. then walked away from the fight and rode away.
In stark contrast with T.K., Jared L. denied punching T.K. at any time during the assault or throwing him down the embankment.
The People filed a two-count section 602 petition, alleging T.K. committed second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211, and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury, in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(4).
Following a bench trial, the juvenile court declined to make a true finding on count 1, but sustained the petition as to count 2 (declaring that count to be a felony), and placed T.K. on home probation.
T.K. timely appealed.
We review a judicial misconduct challenge on a case-by-case basis. (People v. Sanders (1995) 11 Cal.4th 475, 531-532.) We first “ ‘ “determine whether the judge's behavior was so prejudicial that it denied [the defendant] a fair, as opposed to a perfect, trial”' ” and then “make that determination on a case-by-case basis, examining the context of the court's comments and the circumstances under which they occurred.” (People v. Abel (2012) 53 Cal.4th 891, 914.)
On the other hand, it must be said that a trial court can control the examination of witnesses to ensure the efficient “ascertainment of the truth, ” and may examine witnesses on its own motion. (Evid. Code, § 765, subd. (a); Pen. Code, § 1044.) (People v. Mayfield (1997) 14 Cal.4th 668, 739.) The “court has both the discretion and the duty to ask questions of witnesses, provided this is done in an effort to elicit material facts or to clarify confusing or unclear testimony.” (People v. Cook (2006) 39 Cal.4th 566, 597.)
In undertaking an examination, the trial court should be careful not to take on the role of either the prosecutor or the defense. “The court's questioning must be ‘ “temperate, nonargumentative, and scrupulously fair.”' ” (People v. Cook, supra, 39 Cal.4th at p. 597; see also People v. Brown (1993) 6 Cal.4th 322, 333 []; accord, Arizona v. Fulminante (1991) 499 U.S. 279, 309 [111 S.Ct. 1242, 113 L.Ed.2d 302].)
T.K. argues the court committed misconduct by asking numerous and detailed questions of the witnesses. In doing so, the argument goes, the court improperly aligned itself with the prosecution in a way that made the court no longer impartial but rather taking on the role and function of the prosecutor. T.K. insists the court's questioning were “not simply clarifying.” Instead, the court was evidently unsatisfied with the prosecutor's own examination, and so “stepped into the role of a second prosecutor.”
The first challenged testimony occurred after Jared L. had completed his direct and cross-examination. The juvenile court asked the prosecutor to play the video from the beginning. T.K. specifically complains that the court asked the prosecutor to play the video in “few-second increments at a time, ” while asking Jared L. a series of questions, including who was hitting him, why he stood up, and what was happening with Jared L.'s backpack. T.K. highlights the following exchanges:
“The Court: And at this point - what are you trying to do at this point?
“[Jared L.]: Defend myself.
“The Court: And at this time approximately how many strikes or blows are you feeling?
“The Court: And can you tell from what direction they're coming from?
“[Jared L.]: At the time it felt like every direction.”
“The Court: What did you say to this person when you bumped their wheel?
“[Jared L.]: I said, ‘You don't fucking hit people.'
“The Court: Did you - did the person respond to you?
“[Jared L.]: No.
“The Court: When you rode back to that group, did you ever punch anybody?
“[Jared L.]: No.
“The Court: You ever slap somebody back?
“[Jared L.]: No.”
The second examination highlighted by T.K. is his own testimony that followed the completion of direct and cross-examination. T.K. complains that the juvenile court examined T.K. for “six pages” worth of the reporter's transcript.
“[T.K.]: Yes.
“The Court: Why are you so close to him when all this started?
“[T.K.]: I was trying to get a clear video for my social media.
“The Court: And which hand is your camera - your phone in?
“[T.K.]: I'm right-handed, so I was using my right hand.
“[T.K.]: Yes.
“The Court: Where are you at this point?
“[T.K.]: I'm falling down the embankment.
“The Court: You're falling down the embankment?
“[T.K.]: Yes.
“The Court: And did you actually - did you ultimately end up on the ground or just stumble?
“[T.K.]: I - I was rolling on my head and my hip to the bottom.”
“The Court: So that's you coming back into the screen at approximately 13 seconds?
“[T.K.]: Yes.
“[T.K.]: Yes.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial