In Re Englebrecht

67 Cal.App.4th 486 (1998)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The DA filed a complaint for a temporary restraining order and permanent injunction to abate a public nuisance. Members of the street gang known as Varrio Posole Locos or Posole had created a public nuisance by engaging in illegal activity and terrorizing residents within one-square-mile area in Oceanside. The complaint named 28 individuals, including D, and 50 Does as defendants. The complaint alleged gang members regularly commit violent crimes, such as murders, shootings, assaults and batteries, robberies, and also use and sell illegal drugs within the Target Area. Other nuisance activities include: the playing of loud music, which disturbs the peace and quiet of the Target Area; congregating in large groups, which blocks the free passage of persons and interferes with the free use of property; applying graffiti, which adds to the blight of the Target Area; and repeatedly and continually committing trespass upon private property to conduct their illegal and harassing activities. The superior court issued a preliminary injunction against the defendants. It enjoined the defendants from a wide and extensive varieties of conduct in the Target Area. D and his young son were seen standing with Mark Neenan in the front yard of 1408 Lemon Street, which is the residence of D's grandmother. The trio walked down the street to Balderama Park. Neenan is a documented Posole gang member but was not named in the complaint for the preliminary injunction. D was warned that if he was with Neenan he was violating the injunction. D was seen again with Neenan and another gang member subject to the injunction. D was arrested and a pager was also found in his possession. The trial court found D in contempt of court for violating two provisions of the preliminary injunction: (1) associating with a known member of the Posole gang within the Target Area in violation of paragraph (a); and (2) possessing a pager within the Target Area in violation of paragraph (n). The trial court sentenced D to concurrent five-day terms on each violation and fined him $1,000. D appealed.