Client, a 15‑year‑old high school student, was facing two felony counts—assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury under Penal Code § 245(a)(4) and aggravated battery causing serious bodily injury under Penal Code § 243(d)—with personal infliction of great bodily injury enhancements under Penal Code § 1192.7(c)(8). The charges were strike‑eligible and exposed the client to a serious juvenile record with long‑term consequences. After a contested Welfare & Institutions Code § 654 motion, the case was dismissed without any finding.

The case arose from a fight at La Jolla High School. Surveillance video and multiple student statements showed that the alleged victim had a long history of bullying and aggression on campus. On the day of the incident, the victim first harassed another student and then immediately attacked our client as he entered the gym, slamming his head into a door and tackling him to the ground. The victim, who was 30 pounds heavier and several inches taller, drove the client’s head into the pavement while throwing punches.

In the chaos that followed, other students jumped in to help the client, and the victim ended up at the bottom of a pile as students tried to pull him off. The incident lasted less than 15 seconds. Frame‑by‑frame video analysis and recorded student interviews confirmed that the victim was the initial aggressor, and our client’s actions were reactive and defensive in nature.

Griffin Law Office filed a Welfare & Institutions Code § 654 motion for informal supervision and dismissal, presenting the client’s strong school performance, positive family support, and ongoing therapy. We also submitted character letters and evidence of the client’s proactive steps to change schools, engage in counseling, and avoid further conflict.

The court agreed that this was an unusual case where the interests of justice were best served without a wardship finding. The petition was dismissed without any finding, sparing the client a strike and a lasting juvenile record.

This result demonstrates the impact of immediate investigation, careful motion practice, and persuasive mitigation in high‑stakes juvenile cases.