In re B.E.S. CA2/6

── In re B.E.S. CA2/6 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 05, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/5/26 In re B.E.S. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX In re B.E.S., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B348118 Under the Juvenile Court (Super. Ct. No. 2021006846) Law. (Ventura County) THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. B.E.S., Defendant and Appellant. In 2020, B.E.S. was 17 years old when he allegedly sexually abused four young women. In a third amended delinquency petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602), the prosecution alleged that B.E.S. committed six counts of a forcible lewd act upon a child (Pen. Code,1 § 288, subd. (b)(1); counts 1–6), two counts of assault of a person under 18 years old (§ 220, subd. (a)(2); counts 7–8), rape of an intoxicated person (§ 261, subd. (a)(3); count 9), sodomy by anesthesia or controlled substance (§ 286, subd. (i); count 10), forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2); count 11), sexual penetration with force, violence, duress, menace, or fear (§ 289, subd. (a)(1)(A); count 12), and two counts of oral copulation against the victim’s will by force, duress, menace, or fear (§ 287, subd. (c)(2)(A); counts 13–14). The prosecution moved to transfer the matter to an adult court of criminal jurisdiction. While the motion was still pending, B.E.S. failed to appear in court. His counsel informed the court that she no longer had communication with B.E.S. The juvenile court issued a warrant for failure to appear. An investigator found that B.E.S. took a flight to England in December 2024 and did not return. The juvenile court proceeded with the transfer motion with B.E.S. in absentia. The court granted the transfer motion, finding clear and convincing evidence that B.E.S. was not amenable to rehabilitation under the juvenile court’s jurisdiction. Defense counsel appeals the transfer order on B.E.S.’s behalf. The Attorney General moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that B.E.S. is a fugitive from justice. To our knowledge, B.E.S. still has not been located and remains at large. We dismiss the appeal. DISCUSSION An appellate court may dismiss the appeal of a defendant who is a fugitive from justice. (Polanski v. Superior Court (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 507, 531 (Polanski).) As our Supreme Court has 1 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 long recognized: “A party to an action cannot, with right or reason, ask the aid and assistance of a court in hearing his demands while he stands in an attitude of contempt to legal orders and processes of the courts of this state.” (MacPherson v. MacPherson (1939) 13 Cal.2d 271, 277.) “[C]ourts have no jurisdiction over persons charged with crime, unless in custody actual or constructive. It would be a farce to proceed in a criminal cause, unless the Court had control over the person charged, so that its judgment might be effective.” (People v. Redinger (1880) 55 Cal. 290, 298 (Redinger).) “Appellate disentitlement based on fugitive status is not a jurisdictional doctrine, but a discretionary tool that may be applied when the balance of the equitable concerns make it a proper sanction for a party’s flight. [Citation.] Various justifications have been advanced for its application: (1) assuring the enforceability of any decision that may be rendered on or following the appeal [citations]; (2) imposing a penalty for flouting the jud