Court of appeal reversed a juvenile drunk in public finding (647(f)) today because the police officer testified that he did not know about 647(g).
647(g) says that a cop “shall” take someone to a “facility, designated pursuant to [s]ection 5170 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, for the 72-hour treatment and evaluation of inebriates” if that person is arrested for 647(f). And, that a person taken there “shall not thereafter be subject to any criminal prosecution . . . based on the facts giving rise to this placement.” The only caveat to the mandate is that the officer has to be “reasonably able” to take the person to a facility. Factors to decide whether the cop was reasonably able: “distance to the nearest detoxification facility; availability of bed space at 6 detoxification facility; the arrestee’s disposition and willingness to cooperate; and police department resources to transfer the arrestee to facility.”
I feel like it would not be difficult to win a dismissal under this new case. Even if your cop knew about 647(g), he’d have to be able to testify that he discerned how far away the detox facility was which is a fact that you can independently verify. He’d also have to testify about the number of open beds at the facility. Of course, he could lie and say the facility was full but considering I doubt most cops know about this statute, this is a good motion.
The post Move to dismiss your 647(f)s under 647(g) appeared first on juicejusticeandcorgis.
