Legal Opinion

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

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided July 9, 2019No. 2d Crim. No. B292149PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, P. J.

*264A.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…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. WhartonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. People v. RodriguezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  3. People v. KimCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  4. People v. GonzalesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  5. People v. FelixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. ChoiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API