IN RE: LUIS M. (2010)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Minor Luis M. appeals from the order of wardship entered following a finding that he possessed a gun and ammunition in violation of Penal Code section 12101, subdivisions (a) and (b).  Minor contends that the juvenile court erred by denying his motion to suppress statements he made to the police.   We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Minor and his seven-year-old brother lived with their mother in Los Angeles County.   Minor was 17 years 11 months old on September 9, 2009, when minor's mother found a gun inside a box that sat amidst minor's clothing on a high shelf in minor's bedroom closet.   Minor's mother did not know how long the gun had been there, but she went through minor's possessions from time to time to “review” them.   No one else shared that bedroom with minor and for several months, minor's friends had not come inside the house when they visited.   Minor's mother hid the gun in a bathroom cabinet and reported the gun to someone at Wraparound, a program in which minor had been participating as a condition of probation on a prior sustained Welfare & Institutions Code section 602 petition.   Several hours later, Los Angeles Deputy Sheriff Edson Salazar and his partner arrived at minor's residence to investigate the gun report.   Minor was in the front yard when they arrived, but his mother was not home.   Salazar asked minor if he had a gun, and minor said he did not.   For officer safety, Salazar or his partner handcuffed minor and his partner conducted a protective sweep of minor's residence for other people, but no one else was present.   As Salazar, his partner, and minor stepped outside the residence, minor's mother returned home.   Minor's mother told the deputies that she had found a gun in minor's bedroom.   The deputies put minor in the back of their squad car, and Salazar went inside with minor's mother to get the gun, which was a loaded .38-caliber revolver.   Minor's mother wanted the deputies to take the gun away.

Salazar returned to his squad car and read minor his rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [86 S.Ct. 1602] (Miranda ).   Minor waived his rights and admitted that the gun was his.

A Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition was filed against minor alleging he possessed a firearm and live ammunition, in violation of Penal Code section 12101.

At the adjudication hearing, minor moved to exclude his statements to the deputies on the ground his Miranda waiver was involuntary.   At the request of minor's attorney, the juvenile court interrupted Salazar's testimony and permitted minor to testify before Salazar testified to the substance of minor's admission.   Minor testified that when the deputies arrived they handcuffed him, made him sit on the sofa, and questioned him about the gun without advising him of his Miranda rights.   He told the deputies he did not have a gun.   The deputies told him that his mother “had something to do with finding” the gun, and minor thought, “Man, if they already know that my mom found it, I am going to have to say that it's somewhere.”   So he told the deputies, “Well, if you do end up finding anything in the house, I want you to take me in for it.   Don't take my mom or my little brother.   Take me.”   Minor's mother arrived home about 90 minutes later.   At that time, the deputies put him in their car.   A deputy told minor that if he did not “take the blame” for the gun, “they were going to involve” his mother or his family.   Minor started to elaborate, “He said they were going to arrest-” but when asked if the deputies said they were going to arrest minor's mother, minor said he was “not sure about that.”   Minor instead explained, “He said it was going to have to do something with my mom, you know.   It would get her into problems if I didn't take the blame, he said, like involving child-like with my little brother and stuff, that it would get her caught up.   That's when he told me, ‘Oh, write a statement letting the court know that it's your firearm.’ ”   Minor continued, “He said that if I didn't take the blame either one of us would go down for it, and you know, it would be better if I took the blame.   And I had already admitted to it.”   Minor felt he had to take responsibility for the gun because he “felt like, you know, they were going to try and involve my family into something, you know.   So that's the main reason why I spoke up.”   Minor also explained that he felt like he needed to speak to the deputy because he thought the deputy was going to beat him up or “pin something else” on him.   Minor alternately testified that the deputies read him his Miranda rights before he admitted that the gun was his, and that they did not read him his rights until after he admitted owning the gun.   On cross-examination, minor admitted that the gun was his, and he had purchased it for protection.

The juvenile court found that minor had been given his Miranda rights and that minor “was actually quite honest in what he could remember, what he couldn't remember and he-while something was said about his mom getting in trouble, he wasn't sure exactly what it was.  [¶] In response to a question about, ‘Did the officer tell you that they would arrest your mom?’   He said, ‘I think so.   I don't recall.’   So I don't-I can't find that there was a specific threat along those lines.”   The court denied the motion to exclude minor's statements.

The juvenile court sustained the Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition and found that possession of the firearm was a felony, while possession of the ammunition was a misdemeanor.   The court ordered that minor, who had a prior sustained petition, remain a ward of the court and ordered him placed him in camp for four to six months.

DISCUSSION

Minor contends that denial of his motion to suppress his statements was error.   He argues, as he did in the juvenile court, that his Miranda waiver was involuntary, and adds a claim that his admission was coerced by the deputy's threats against minor's mother.   The latter claim was not raised in the juvenile court and was not preserved by minor's Miranda claim.   (People v. Rundle (2008) 43 Cal.4th 76, 121, disapproved on another ground in People v. Doolin (2009) 45 Cal.4th 390, 421, fn. 22.)   The voluntariness of a Miranda waiver is distinct from the issue of whether the statement itself was voluntary or the product of physical or psychological coercion by law enforcement.  (Edwards v. Arizona (1981) 451 U.S. 477, 483-484 [101 S.Ct. 1880].)

With respect to minor's waiver of his rights to silence and the presence of counsel, we need not dwell on the intricacies of the law or analyze the voluntariness of his waiver because if the juvenile court erred, its error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.  (People v. Sims (1993) 5 Cal.4th 405, 447.)   Beyond a reasonable doubt, the juvenile court's denial of minor's motion to exclude his admission to the deputies that he owned the gun did not contribute to the juvenile court's finding that the petition was true.   Salazar recovered the gun from minor's residence.   Minor's mother testified that she found the gun on a high shelf in minor's bedroom closet, amidst his clothing.   The only other people who resided in the home were minor's mother and a seven-year-old, and the bedroom in which minor's mother found the gun was used solely by minor.   Minor's mother would not have called anyone about finding the gun or asked the deputies to take it away if it were hers, and nothing indicated the seven-year-old had access to minor's closet or could reach the high shelf on which the gun was found.   Even assuming that minor did not own the gun, he clearly possessed it and the ammunition with which Salazar testified it was loaded.   There was no evidence or claim that someone else had placed the gun in minor's room, and this possibility was substantially negated by minor's mother, who testified that she regularly went through minor's possessions and that for several months, minor's friends had not come inside the house.

DISPOSITION

The order under review is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

We concur:

CHANEY, J. JOHNSON, J.