Venegas v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, B218948

DAVID VENEGAS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES et al., Defendants and Respondents.

B218948

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN

Filed: August 23, 2011

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC207136)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John A. Torribio, Judge. Reversed.

Robert Mann and Donald W. Cook for Plaintiffs and Appellants David Venegas and Beatriz Salazar Venegas.

Lawrence Beach Allen & Choi, David D. Lawrence, Jin S. Choi and Scott E. Caron, for Defendants and Respondents County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and Robert Harris.

David Venegas, his wife, Beatriz Salazar Venegas, and their minor son Vincent filed an action against the County of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, the Cities of Vernon and El Segundo, and several named and unnamed individual law enforcement officers, including Sheriff Lee Baca, alleging violations of federal and state civil rights laws and state tort law arising out of the June 24, 1998 detention/arrest of David and Beatriz¹ by members of the Task Force for Regional Auto Theft Prevention (TRAP), the search of the Venegas home by sheriff's deputies and the subsequent incarceration of David for three days.²

Through a series of trial court rulings and appellate decisions over the last decade,³the Venegases' claims of civil rights violations have been whittled away. This appeal concerns their remaining claim under Civil Code section 52.1 (section 52.1), which provides an independent remedy for damages, equitable relief and attorney fees against "a person or persons, whether or not acting under color of law, [who] interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state . . . ." ⁴ The Venegases contend the trial court erred in granting the County defendants' summary judgment motion on theground the Venegases had failed to demonstrate a triable issue of material fact that any interference with their constitutional rights had been caused by threats, intimidation or coercion. We agree and reverse.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND⁵

1. The June 24, 1998 Incident

a. The initial detention of David and Beatriz

TRAP was an interagency task force run by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to facilitate multi-jurisdictional car theft investigations. Defendant Steven Wiles, a police officer for the City of Vernon, was assigned to the southeast TRAP. At approximately 7:00 p.m. on June 24, 1998, Wiles was in a staging area in Bellflower with other TRAP members preparing to execute a search warrant for a nearby residence belonging to Ricardo Venegas, the older brother of David. Wiles had information Ricardo was involved in switching vehicle identification numbers (VINs) on stolen cars (particularly white pickup trucks) and fraudulently obtaining titles from the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in Temecula. Wiles had a photograph of Ricardo and a description of him as 5 feet, 11 inches tall, weighing 210 pounds.

While the TRAP team was waiting in the staging area, a Mercury Cougar with no license plates drove past. The driver was a woman, later identified as Beatriz; her male passenger, later identified as David, appeared to some TRAP officers to resemble Ricardo. The TRAP officers followed the car until it stopped at a gas station about a block away. According to Wiles, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputies Michael Gray and Robert Harris were the first officers to arrive at the gas station and contact David.

Beatriz went inside the gas station to pay while David stood outside by the car to pump the gas. Two TRAP cars pulled into the gas station and blocked the Cougar. Four officers in casual clothes, but with badges around their necks, approached David andasked him who he was and whether he knew a Ricardo Venegas. David told them Ricardo was his brother. Other officers approached Beatriz when she came out of the gas station building and detained her apart from David.

According to Wiles, David became irate at the officers' questioning, using profanities and inquiring why he was not free to go. Because of David's belligerent attitude, he was handcuffed for officer safety. Gray admitted being at the gas station and participating in the decision to detain David.

Wiles spoke with David while other officers searched the Cougar for its VIN. In response to Wiles's questions about the Cougar, David told him he had just bought the car in Los Angeles; it was a salvaged vehicle; he and Beatriz had gone to the DMV and were told they had to go to the California Highway Patrol to have a VIN issued. Los Angeles Police Officer Peloquin, Wiles's partner on the TRAP team, spent about 10 minutes unsuccessfully searching for a public VIN on the Cougar. He did, however, inform Wiles he found a partial VIN on the car's engine. Meanwhile, another officer searched the glove box and under the seats of the car. This officer found an odometer disclosure statement with a VIN number consistent with the partial VIN on the car's engine, a bill of sale and a blank application for registration. The bill of sale and odometer disclosure statement listed Beatriz as the buyer and gave the date of sale as two weeks earlier.

After the officers learned the car had no public VIN, they decided to impound it to determine whether it was stolen. According to Peloquin, the fact the partial VIN on the engine matched the VIN as stated on the odometer disclosure statement was not conclusive evidence the car had not been stolen because the engine and transmission could have been replaced. David admitted to Wiles he knew the public VIN was missing. He told Wiles the person who sold him the car had told him it was a salvaged vehicle. Wiles testified at that point he did not know whether the paperwork found in the vehicle was fraudulent. Although Beatriz produced a California driver's license, David had no driver's license or California identification card in his possession. Beatriz showed the officers David's employee badge, which included his photograph and identified him asDavid Venegas; but some of the officers believed it did not positively identify David as not being Ricardo. Wiles, however, admitted he knew within minutes David, who was only five feet, 6 inches tall, was not Ricardo.

b. The search of the Venegas home

David or Beatriz told the officers David had his identification at their home, a short distance from the gas station. Wiles asked David to sign an entry and search waiver form to allow the officers to go to his home to retrieve his identification. David initially refused to consent, but apparently thereafter orally agreed the officers could accompany Beatriz to their home for that limited purpose. David testified he and Beatriz were told the officers would not search the home.

According to Wiles it was necessary to go to David's home to obtain his identification because a positive identification "is to be made through a valid license where we can run the name through dispatch and find out who he is." Wiles testified neither he nor any of the other officers processed David's name through the computer system, even though, he conceded, they could have done so and found out whether the person described in the system fit the description of the person they had in front of them.

Wiles remained at the gas station for about 10 to 15 minutes before his immediate supervisor told him to leave to serve the search warrant at Ricardo's home. At that point the officers placed David, still handcuffed, in the back of Harris's van. Wiles admitted that Beatriz was not free to leave while at the gas station.

According to El Segundo Police Officer Rudy Kerkhof, also assigned to the TRAP team, someone told him the Venegases had consented to a search of their home. He testified it was possible he was the one who obtained Beatriz's signature on a written entry and search waiver form, which had been filled in by another officer and handed to him. The waiver form provided in part Beatriz "hereby grant[s] full and unconditional authority to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to enter those [above described] premises to conduct a search for identification—C.D.L.—and to conduct any related investigation in any related criminal or non-criminal law enforcement matter." (Italics added.) This statement was preprinted on the form except for the italicizedportion, which was handwritten by Harris on blank lines contained on the form. Kerkhof drove Beatriz to her home. According to Beatriz, the officers said she could not go into her home alone to retrieve her husband's identification.

After arriving at her home with Kerkhof, Beatriz obtained David's California identification card from their bedroom and brought it along with David's wallet to the officer in her living room. The officer took David's wallet from her and searched it. Two other police officers arrived at the home. Beatriz sat with Kerkhof on the couch in the living room while the other officers searched the entire house including Vincent's bedroom. While David was sitting in the van with Harris, Harris received a radio call stating the officers had verified David's identification.

About an hour after Wiles left the gas station, he received a radio call from Harris informing him David's identification had been verified and that David was on felony probation for drug dealing. Wiles decided at...