## Facts

- Police responded to a call from a juvenile’s mother reporting her 15-year-old son was violent, possibly under the influence of drugs, and unable to care for himself.
- Officers found the juvenile upstairs in a bedroom, restrained by others, violently attacking his brother, with extremely slurred speech, red eyes, poor balance, and no odor of alcohol.
- Based on training and observations, officers believed he was under the influence of drugs and unable to exercise care for his own safety or the safety of others.
- The mother stated she could not control him and feared he would become sick and someone might be hurt; she planned to call an ambulance.
- Officers handcuffed the juvenile, assisted him downstairs because he could not walk without help, and transported him to a hospital after instructing the mother to cancel the ambulance.
- At the hospital, during medical efforts to treat suspected ingestion (including preparation for gastric lavage), a doctor ordered the juvenile’s boots removed; a packet of pills fell out, appearing consistent with Tuinal.
- A juvenile wardship petition alleged only a violation of Penal Code § 647(f) (being in a public place under the influence to the extent unable to care for safety); the juvenile court sustained the petition and placed him home on probation.

## Issues

1. Whether handcuffing and transporting the juvenile to a hospital constituted an unlawful arrest or unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment, rather than a reasonable emergency detention for medical aid.
2. Whether the pills discovered when a doctor ordered the juvenile’s boots removed for treatment were the product of an unlawful police search or seizure.
3. Whether substantial evidence supported the elements of Penal Code § 647(f), including the “public place” and the “unable to exercise care for safety” requirements.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the juvenile court’s order sustaining the Penal Code § 647(f) finding and the probation disposition.
- The handcuffing and transport to the hospital were upheld as a reasonable, noncriminal detention justified by exigent circumstances and the need to protect the juvenile and others.
- The pill discovery was treated as incidental to medical treatment, not a police search, and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
- Substantial evidence supported that the juvenile was under the influence to the degree required by § 647(f), and the “public place” element was satisfied on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Officers may temporarily restrain and transport an intoxicated or drug-impaired person for emergency medical assistance when the purpose is safety and aid rather than criminal investigation; such conduct can be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment even if handcuffs are used.
- Actions by medical personnel undertaken for diagnosis or treatment are not transformed into a police “search” merely because officers are present or later use evidence incidentally revealed during treatment.
- For Penal Code § 647(f), observable impairment (e.g., slurred speech, loss of balance, violent behavior) and evidence that the person cannot exercise care for personal or others’ safety can establish the required level of intoxication; corroborating medical circumstances may support the finding.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a juvenile’s § 647(f) adjudication where officers reasonably restrained and transported him for emergency medical aid, pills were discovered through medical treatment rather than police searching, and the evidence showed drug impairment rendering him unable to care for safety in a manner satisfying the statute’s public-place requirement on the case’s facts.


In re David W., 116 Cal. App. 3d 689, 172 Cal. Rptr. 266 (Ct. App. 1981)