California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Thierry S., In re, 139 Cal.Rptr. 708, 19 Cal.3d 727, 566 P.2d 610 (Cal. 1977):
6 Before proceeding further with our analysis, we must first clarify certain terminology which we utilize in the remainder of this opinion. Neither section 625 nor section 625.1 refer to the term 'arrest.' (Compare Pen.Code, 836.) Instead, both sections use the phrase 'take into temporary custody' to describe the procedure employed by peace officers acting pursuant to those sections to detain juveniles believed to have violated a criminal law. When an individual, be he adult or juvenile, has had his personal liberty restrained by a peace officer acting on the belief that the individual has violated a criminal law, there is no meaningful difference between characterization of that detention as an 'arrest' or 'temporary custody.' (Cf. People v. Olivas, supra, 17 Cal.3d 236, 244--245.) Furthermore, the Penal Code itself defines arrest as 'taking a person into custody, in a case and in the manner authorized by law.' (Pen.Code, 834.) In the present case Deputy Bolts testified that after he took the two boys into custody he informed them that 'they were under custody he informed them that 'they were under constitute essentially identical procedures we use those terms interchangeably and attach no particular significance to the use of either one.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.