Y.C. v. Super. Ct.


Filed 12/6/21 (unmodified opinion attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR Y.C., Petitioner, A162063 v. (San Mateo County THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN Super. Ct. No. 20JW0474) MATEO COUNTY, ORDER MODIFYING OPINION; Respondent; AND DENYING PETITION FOR THE PEOPLE, REHEARING [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] Real Party in Interest. THE COURT: Petitioner’s petition for rehearing, filed November 23, 2021, is denied. Justice Streeter dissents from this denial and would have granted Petitioner’s request. It is ordered that the opinion filed November 8, 2021, be modified as follows: 1. On page 12 of the opinion, following the final full sentence, insert as footnote number 5 the following text, and renumber all subsequent footnotes accordingly: Citing Cramer v Tyars (1979) 23 Cal.3d 131, 137, Y.C. also argues that the Fifth Amendment gives him a right not to be called as a  Pollak, P.J., Streeter, J., Tucher, J. participated in the decision. 1 witness in a criminal case. This is true but irrelevant, as Y.C. has not claimed he was, or will be, called as a witness in any court proceeding. 2. On page 17 of the opinion: Delete the final sentence (which carries over to page 18) and subsequent citation, which read: Separately, CMIA also authorizes a provider of health care to disclose medical information to a probation officer “or any other person who is legally authorized to have custody or care of a minor for the purpose of coordinating health care services and medical treatment provided to the minor.” (Civ. Code, § 56.103, subd. (a).) Modifications to Justice Streeter’s Concurrence and Dissent: 1. On page 6 of Justice Streeter’s concurrence and dissent, in the first full paragraph (which begins: To the extent we are reaching the merits, . . .) immediately after the seventh full sentence (which reads: In my view, BHRS—a public health agency that delivers mental health services to juveniles—is clearly a “covered entity” since it is a “health care provider.”), insert as footnote number 6 the following text, and renumber all subsequent footnotes accordingly: 6 At pages 31 and 32 of the brief supporting Y.C.’s writ petition, he cites and provides Web addresses for four judicially noticeable government records (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (c)) as proof of this. One of these documents, published by BHRS and entitled “Mental Health Plan Outpatient Provider Manual,” is addressed to BHRS’s contracted clinicians for a number of different types of its health services, including “assessment services,” which are described as “clinical analysis of the history and current status of the client’s mental, emotional or behavioral condition.” (San Mateo County Health System Behavioral Health & Recovery Services, Mental Health Plan Outpatient Provider Manual (Dec. 2017) <https://www. smchealth.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/provider_ manual_ppn_12.26.17_0.pdf> [as of Dec. 3, 2021].) As an orientation to its policies, BHRS advises these clinicians as follows: “It is essential that in your practice you develop, communicate and utilize forms, policies and procedures that are in compliance with HIPAA. We 2 recommend …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals