California legal folder and automatic

[Locutus D'Borg]

Your city or county may have its own rules, but for auto's, 2" blade. Makers produce cali legal autos (Microtech Exocet and Troodon Mini, Kershaw's launch 4 & 5, and other makers). I live in San diego. I have mainly 3" folders because that length is legal pretty much in every county and almost all states. YMMV

 

[Final Edge]

Just for the sake of complete accuracy-

It's also illegal to carry a switchblade (blade 2" or longer) on ones person on private property, including in ones own home.

This is the result of an Appeals Court ruling from 2009, People v SC (a juvenile court case, so no name of defendant).

Notice how in statute 21510, under part (b), it only says "Carries the knife upon the person", with no mention of public or private property/places. Link-

https://www.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21510.&lawCode=PEN

In People v SC, Mr. SC was found to have a switchblade on his person (in a pocket) while on private property. He was arrested, convicted, and appealed. He tried to argue that the "public place" reference in part (a), which refers to a switchblade in a vehicle in a public place, should also apply to part (b), carrying a switchblade on ones person, and that since he was carrying on private property rather than a public place that his conviction should be overturned.

But the Appeals Court did not agree, ruling that because part (b) doesn't specify public or private property, that it applies to everywhere in the state, including in ones own home.

Here are some quotes from their ruling-

"we conclude the statute is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

"A switchblade carried on the person represents a constant threat to others, whether carried in public or in private".

"A switchblade carried at home, for example, is dangerous to family members and house guests during an argument".

This is one of the most boneheaded rulings that I have seen the California Appeals Court make. But on the bright side, there is language in that ruling, that in my opinion, confirms ones legal right to possess "switchblades" (blades 2" or longer), in the state of California.

Here is a link to their ruling- https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

Note: That ruling refers to section 653k, which was the switchblade statute in 2009, California later changed how they numbered penal code statutes. Section 653k was changed to 21510.

Although I moved out of California 10 years ago, this information is rather disturbing. So what this ruling actually states is that it is legal to keep a switchblade knife in your home, but the moment you pick it up, you are in actuality carrying it, and so in violation of the law. I don't see how they are actually saying anything different than the previous sentence. Amazing.

 

[killgar]

Although I moved out of California 10 years ago, this information is rather disturbing. So what this ruling actually states is that it is legal to keep a switchblade knife in your home, but the moment you pick it up, you are in actuality carrying it, and so in violation of the law. I don't see how they are actually saying anything different than the previous sentence. Amazing.

Technically speaking it all depends on the definition of "carries the knife on the person". In the case of People v SC the defendant was carrying the knife in his pocket. It is a bit subjective, and it's possible that just holding a switchblade in one's hand could be considered a violation of the law.

However, there would have to be a cop there to see you do it. And what are the chances that there will be a cop present in your home or on your property to see you carrying a switchblade. This is something that is easy to avoid.

Like I said, I consider the courts ruling on this particular matter to be boneheaded.

But as a resident of California who owns switchblades, I'm not worried about it. I don't have LEO's in my home, and if I were going to have one in my home for an official reason I'd put my switchblades away.

 

[Final Edge]

I guess I should have clarified better. It isn't the threat of arrest or something similar I was referring to with the word "disturbing". The disturbing element was the logic involved in coming to this decision. Considering all the possible weapons available to a home owner to legally defend themselves and their families, they felt it necessary to disqualify a switchblade above let's say an 8 inch chef's knife or a 22 inch machete - not to mention countless other deadly objects you can carry around your property freely.

 

[killgar]

I guess I should have clarified better. It isn't the threat of arrest or something similar I was referring to with the word "disturbing". The disturbing element was the logic involved in coming to this decision. Considering all the possible weapons available to a home owner to legally defend themselves and their families, they felt it necessary to disqualify a switchblade above let's say an 8 inch chef's knife or a 22 inch machete - not to mention countless other deadly objects you can carry around your property freely.

I agree completely. And those were my exact thoughts when I read the ruling. It struck me as being rather ridiculous that the court chose to single out switchblades as "dangerous" weapons when kitchen knives are so commonplace. That's why I call it a "bonehead" ruling.

I think it's a safe bet that the vast majority of crimes committed with knives in this country are committed with kitchen knives, in particular domestic violence cases, since kitchen knives tend to be readily available.

Unfortunately this is not the only stupid ruling from the California Appeals Court, and it won't be the last. However, to their credit the court has made several rulings that have benefited knife owners, users, and enthusiasts, but their decision in People v SC is not among their best work.

 

[Puppy'sPal]

akti.org/state-knife-laws/california/

Been there, done that, many times....and still no help. When it comes to my specific example, hypothetical scenario, which very well could happen given break-ins and home intrusions/invasions are not that uncommon, Killgar and others breakdown has offered some points of reference.

From what I can gather, one should be OK if such a scenario arose, to use an auto knife in self-defense given it is A) within the premise/domicile, and B) grabbed, not carried on person or in pocket. Given there's no way to prove unless the intruder claims "nope, he pulled it out of his pocket" but then again, how credible will the attacker's word be in said trial? Also, its absolutely absurd to not have laws or overlook 8-10" kitchen knives yet a 4" auto is deemed a weapon. Go figure.

I pray and hope no such scenario ever arises but almost safe to guess if it did, believe most people would grab what they could, maybe even what they had on them or on a dresser to defend their own lives or the lives of their loved ones. After all, isn't that what the right to bare arms is all about?

 

[EVISCERATOR]

A unavoidable trip to the California cesspool and restrictive gun / automatic knife laws, influenced my re-discovery of Cold Steel folders. Always liked the CS fixed blades, but avoided their folders because I thought they were plastic and of poor quality. When I discovered there was no CA length limitation on folding knives, I sought out the largest (reasonable) folder I could find and took a chance on the Voyager XL Tanto which changed my opinion on CS knives.

 

[killgar]

Woah, woah, woah, the wording is so nuts in regards to this California law. Can't even store in one's car in one's own garage? What if it's a vintage switchblade stored in an old restored VW that always remains parked in the garage? Mind blowing.

I know I'm a month late, but apparently I missed this^ last time around, and now that the thread has been bumped and I've re-read it I wanted to address this point.

It is perfectly legal to have a switchblade in ones vehicle in ones own garage, in fact in People v SC the California Appeals court specifically said that it is.

Here is what they said regarding this subject-

Quote- "a violation of the vehicle clause occurs only when such constructive possession occurs in a "public place or place open to the public", however, a conviction cannot be based on the presence of a switchblade knife in the passenger area of a car when the car is located in a nonpublic place. As a result, for example, it is not a violation of section 653k (21510) to keep a switchblade in the glove compartment, as long as the car is parked in a private garage".

Now they aren't saying the knife must be in the glove compartment, they are only offering that as one example. The reference to "passenger area" means the entire interior of the vehicle. And of course it's always legal to have switchblades locked in the trunk of ones vehicle, even in public places.

 

[VorpelSword]

I don't digest the written word that well.

What I get from some of the posts here is that California law allows pocket carry of any size folding knife as long as it is folded. My guess is that local jurisdictions may be m ore restrictive.

It is my inexpert and poorly informed opinion that the Bill of Rights supports open carry of about any cutting tool through the explicit protections of the Second Amendment. . . .just as it does for firearms.

Contrast this with knife laws in the UK where it is now forbidden to carry any cutting tool in any manner, pocket or belt, in public.

 

[killgar]

What I get from some of the posts here is that California law allows pocket carry of any size folding knife as long as it is folded. My guess is that local jurisdictions may be m ore restrictive.

You are correct, as long as the knife is a manual-opening knife and does not meet the California definition of a "switchblade" (most one-hand openers don't meet that definition), then they are legal to carry under CA state law. Some cities/counties do have there own blade length limits, but those limits are on openly carried knives.

For example, Los Angeles has a 3" blade length limit on openly-carried knives of any kind. So it is perfectly legal to walk around LA in public with a manual folding knife, with a 4" blade (or longer), carried closed and concealed in ones pocket, but it would be a violation of LA codes to carry the same knife openly and visible. Although it is legal to openly carry a manual folder with a blade under 3". None of this makes any kind of logical sense, but that's not unusual when it comes to knife laws.

There are however exceptions to the LA blade length limit that allow for the open-carry of any size knife (manual folder or fixed-blade), if the knife is carried for work, recreational activities, or religious worship.

It is my inexpert and poorly informed opinion that the Bill of Rights supports open carry of about any cutting tool through the explicit protections of the Second Amendment. . . .just as it does for firearms.

Although I, and many others agree, both the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment face significant challenges (political opposition) in the state on California, particularly on the subject of firearms.

 

[RobMofSD]

Just remember that the definition of switchblade is NOT what you would expect. For example in our last thread where is was discussed, Kickstop knives like the new Chaves would be switchblades under California law.

 

[Ca Republican]

I was told in California, folder blade length must be less than 3''. is that correct?
I was told in California, automatic blade length must be less than 2''. is that correct?

Native Californian here, the only blade restriction is for autos at less than 2".

There are no other blade length restrictions. The other restriction worth noting is for fixed blades which must be carried openly regardless of length.

 

[Legendary_Jarl]

Just for the sake of complete accuracy-

It's also illegal to carry a switchblade (blade 2" or longer) on ones person on private property, including in ones own home.

This is the result of an Appeals Court ruling from 2009, People v SC (a juvenile court case, so no name of defendant).

Notice how in statute 21510, under part (b), it only says "Carries the knife upon the person", with no mention of public or private property/places. Link-

https://www.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21510.&lawCode=PEN

In People v SC, Mr. SC was found to have a switchblade on his person (in a pocket) while on private property. He was arrested, convicted, and appealed. He tried to argue that the "public place" reference in part (a), which refers to a switchblade in a vehicle in a public place, should also apply to part (b), carrying a switchblade on ones person, and that since he was carrying on private property rather than a public place that his conviction should be overturned.

But the Appeals Court did not agree, ruling that because part (b) doesn't specify public or private property, that it applies to everywhere in the state, including in ones own home.

Here are some quotes from their ruling-

"we conclude the statute is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

"A switchblade carried on the person represents a constant threat to others, whether carried in public or in private".

"A switchblade carried at home, for example, is dangerous to family members and house guests during an argument".

This is one of the most boneheaded rulings that I have seen the California Appeals Court make. But on the bright side, there is language in that ruling, that in my opinion, confirms ones legal right to possess "switchblades" (blades 2" or longer), in the state of California.

Here is a link to their ruling- https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

Note: That ruling refers to section 653k, which was the switchblade statute in 2009, California later changed how they numbered penal code statutes. Section 653k was changed to 21510.

I read the ruling you shared. Thank you for posting that. It has to be the most ridiculous "rationale" I've ever heard. "dangerous to family members specially during arguments". LOL? What kind of arguments are these people having? Aren't fixed blade kitchen knives with longer blades far more dangerous? Let me shut up before I give them more ideas.

 

[killgar]

I read the ruling you shared. Thank you for posting that. It has to be the most ridiculous "rationale" I've ever heard. "dangerous to family members specially during arguments". LOL? What kind of arguments are these people having? Aren't fixed blade kitchen knives with longer blades far more dangerous? Let me shut up before I give them more ideas.

The People v SC ruling is a mixed bag. Some bad, but I'd also say a lot good.

You're right, the courts reasoning behind their decision that carrying a switchblade on private property, including in ones own home violates the switchblade carry statute (21510) is ludicrous. Just goes to show how dumb high-and-mighty judges can be.

For those reading this post, but who haven't read, or won't read People v SC, here is a relevant quote from the courts ruling-

"we conclude that the statute (21510) is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

They also specifically refer to carrying in ones home, and other references to carrying on private property.


But lets look on the good side of the ruling-

I have seen it said here at Bladeforums, and elsewhere online that there is a total ban on the possession of switchblades in the state of California, a statement I strongly disagree with. I say that there is a considerable amount of evidence to the contrary. I will take this opportunity to provide just some of that evidence, specifically from the People v SC ruling. Every reference to a switchblade throughout the rest of this post is a refence to the legal definition of a switchblade in the state of California, with a blade 2" or longer.

In their ruling on People v SC, the court refers to CA pc 653k (what is illegal to do with switchblades), but the statute numbers were revised since this ruling, and 653k is now 21510.

First- The court went into great detail regarding what is illegal to do with switchblades in California, but nowhere in the ruling did the court make any reference whatsoever to a total ban on the possession of switchblades. They could have, they could have simply said that it is illegal to possess a switchblade under any circumstances in California, and that would constitute a total ban on possession, but they didn't, and that is significant.

They did repeatedly refer to "carrying" a switchblade on ones person as being illegal, inferring a total ban on the "carrying" of switchblades on ones person, but not mere "possession", and that too is significant.

In fact, the court specifically said things that make it obvious to me that there is no total ban on the possession of switchblades, and that it was not the courts intention to create such a ban.

For example, here is a quote from the courts ruling regarding switchblades in vehicles, one of the topics they covered in detail- "a conviction cannot be based on the presence of a switchblade knife in the passenger area of a car when the car is located in a nonpublic place."

Now, if there were a total ban on the possession of switchblades in California, that ban would naturally include switchblades in cars located in nonpublic places. But the court specifically said that a switchblade in a car in a nonpublic place is not a convictable offense.

Another quote- "it is not a violation of section 653k (21510) to keep a switchblade in the glove compartment, as long as the car is parked in a private garage."

Again, when the court says that it's legal to have a switchblade in the glove compartment of your car when it's parked in your garage, then in my opinion there is clearly no total ban on the possession of switchblades in California.


Another good thing about the ruling, nowhere did the court say that it is a crime to receive or purchase a switchblade. They reaffirmed that it is illegal to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, loan, transfer, or give a switchblade to any person, but no mention of receiving or buying.

So although the court did rule that it is illegal to carry a switchblade on private property, including ones own property, and even in ones own home, lets look on the bright side- in my opinion, the court also confirmed that we here in California have the right to own switchblades, that there is no total ban, and that it is not a crime to purchase, order, or receive a switchblade. And that ain't nothing .

And besides, who's really gonna know if you're carrying a switchblade in your own home or on your own property .

 

[Frisco Felon]

And besides, who's really gonna know if you're carrying a switchblade in your own home or on your own property .

Exactly. It's not very likely that many would call the authorities on themselves!

 

[BootKnifeFan]

The People v SC ruling is a mixed bag. Some bad, but I'd also say a lot good.

You're right, the courts reasoning behind their decision that carrying a switchblade on private property, including in ones own home violates the switchblade carry statute (21510) is ludicrous. Just goes to show how dumb high-and-mighty judges can be.

For those reading this post, but who haven't read, or won't read People v SC, here is a relevant quote from the courts ruling-

"we conclude that the statute (21510) is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

They also specifically refer to carrying in ones home, and other references to carrying on private property.


But lets look on the good side of the ruling-

I have seen it said here at Bladeforums, and elsewhere online that there is a total ban on the possession of switchblades in the state of California, a statement I strongly disagree with. I say that there is a considerable amount of evidence to the contrary. I will take this opportunity to provide just some of that evidence, specifically from the People v SC ruling. Every reference to a switchblade throughout the rest of this post is a refence to the legal definition of a switchblade in the state of California, with a blade 2" or longer.

In their ruling on People v SC, the court refers to CA pc 653k (what is illegal to do with switchblades), but the statute numbers were revised since this ruling, and 653k is now 21510.

First- The court went into great detail regarding what is illegal to do with switchblades in California, but nowhere in the ruling did the court make any reference whatsoever to a total ban on the possession of switchblades. They could have, they could have simply said that it is illegal to possess a switchblade under any circumstances in California, and that would constitute a total ban on possession, but they didn't, and that is significant.

They did repeatedly refer to "carrying" a switchblade on ones person as being illegal, inferring a total ban on the "carrying" of switchblades on ones person, but not mere "possession", and that too is significant.

In fact, the court specifically said things that make it obvious to me that there is no total ban on the possession of switchblades, and that it was not the courts intention to create such a ban.

For example, here is a quote from the courts ruling regarding switchblades in vehicles, one of the topics they covered in detail- "a conviction cannot be based on the presence of a switchblade knife in the passenger area of a car when the car is located in a nonpublic place."

Now, if there were a total ban on the possession of switchblades in California, that ban would naturally include switchblades in cars located in nonpublic places. But the court specifically said that a switchblade in a car in a nonpublic place is not a convictable offense.

Another quote- "it is not a violation of section 653k (21510) to keep a switchblade in the glove compartment, as long as the car is parked in a private garage."

Again, when the court says that it's legal to have a switchblade in the glove compartment of your car when it's parked in your garage, then in my opinion there is clearly no total ban on the possession of switchblades in California.


Another good thing about the ruling, nowhere did the court say that it is a crime to receive or purchase a switchblade. They reaffirmed that it is illegal to sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, loan, transfer, or give a switchblade to any person, but no mention of receiving or buying.

So although the court did rule that it is illegal to carry a switchblade on private property, including ones own property, and even in ones own home, lets look on the bright side- in my opinion, the court also confirmed that we here in California have the right to own switchblades, that there is no total ban, and that it is not a crime to purchase, order, or receive a switchblade. And that ain't nothing .

And besides, who's really gonna know if you're carrying a switchblade in your own home or on your own property .

[QUOTE="killgar, post:







Police could end up in your home or on your property for any number of reasons. In my state, Massachusetts, a 911 call for a medical emergency brings an ambulance, a fire truck and at least one police cruiser. All are "first responders" and will enter your home whether you like it or not. Many LTC and FID licensed gun owners are charged with improper storage of a firearm under these circumstances, when the police see an unlocked gun in "plain view". Any other illegally possessed items are also fair game under the plain view doctrine.

 

[killgar]

[QUOTE="killgar, post:







Police could end up in your home or on your property for any number of reasons. In my state, Massachusetts, a 911 call for a medical emergency brings an ambulance, a fire truck and at least one police cruiser. All are "first responders" and will enter your home whether you like it or not. Many LTC and FID licensed gun owners are charged with improper storage of a firearm under these circumstances, when the police see an unlocked gun in "plain view". Any other illegally possessed items are also fair game under the plain view doctrine.

Yes, such things are possible, and I've warned people about unexpected visits from LEO's and the risk of having illegal weapons displayed out in the open in their homes on this forum in the past. But I didn't say anything about guns in "plain view" in my post, I specifically referred to carrying a switchblade in ones pocket, on ones own property.

A gun in plain view is just that- a gun in plain view. And if it's illegal to have an unlocked gun in your home, in your state, and it's in plain view for the cops to see, then that would be an obvious violation of the law and the police would be within their legal authority to act upon that. But this thread is specifically about California, and switchblades, and under our state law it's legal to carry a knife in ones pocket. That means the only way an LEO is going to know that someone is carrying a switchblade in their pocket, on their own property, as opposed to a manual knife, is if the LEO, or someone else takes it out for the LEO to examine, and that raises issues of consent, and the Fourth Amendment.

The police cannot lawfully enter ones property and search their person without either consent, a warrant, or probable cause. And if a person were, say, having a heart attack, and a paramedic pulled a switchblade out of the persons pocket and gave it to the police, well, obviously the person did not consent to being searched, and if they were not in official custody at the time, or under suspicion of criminal activity, then again, there are going to be very real Fourth Amendment issues regarding the discovery of the knife. The mere fact that someone engaged in illegal activity is not the only determining factor in whether or not they are charged or convicted of a crime. How that illegal activity was discovered is a very relevant and determining factor.

But I've ventured into "hypothetical territory", and I could come up with a variety of hypothetical scenarios where an LEO might discover a person were carrying a switchblade on their own property. However, I consider such scenarios to be very unlikely to occur in my life, so unlikely that I don't worry about them, nor would I allow them to deny me what I consider to be the exercising of my basic freedom to carry what I want on my own property.

Bottom line- Of all the things I'm going to worry about in life, the idea of the police discovering the knife in my pocket, when I'm at home, is not on the list.

But that's me. Others can gauge their own level of risk for themselves and choose accordingly.

 

[BootKnifeFan]

Yes, such things are possible, and I've warned people about unexpected visits from LEO's and the risk of having illegal weapons displayed out in the open in their homes on this forum in the past. But I didn't say anything about guns in "plain view" in my post, I specifically referred to carrying a switchblade in ones pocket, on ones own property.

A gun in plain view is just that- a gun in plain view. And if it's illegal to have an unlocked gun in your home, in your state, and it's in plain view for the cops to see, then that would be an obvious violation of the law and the police would be within their legal authority to act upon that. But this thread is specifically about California, and switchblades, and under our state law it's legal to carry a knife in ones pocket. That means the only way an LEO is going to know that someone is carrying a switchblade in their pocket, on their own property, as opposed to a manual knife, is if the LEO, or someone else takes it out for the LEO to examine, and that raises issues of consent, and the Fourth Amendment.

The police cannot lawfully enter ones property and search their person without either consent, a warrant, or probable cause. And if a person were, say, having a heart attack, and a paramedic pulled a switchblade out of the persons pocket and gave it to the police, well, obviously the person did not consent to being searched, and if they were not in official custody at the time, or under suspicion of criminal activity, then again, there are going to be very real Fourth Amendment issues regarding the discovery of the knife. The mere fact that someone engaged in illegal activity is not the only determining factor in whether or not they are charged or convicted of a crime. How that illegal activity was discovered is a very relevant and determining factor.

But I've ventured into "hypothetical territory", and I could come up with a variety of hypothetical scenarios where an LEO might discover a person were carrying a switchblade on their own property. However, I consider such scenarios to be very unlikely to occur in my life, so unlikely that I don't worry about them, nor would I allow them to deny me what I consider to be the exercising of my basic freedom to carry what I want on my own property.

Bottom line- Of all the things I'm going to worry about in life, the idea of the police discovering the knife in my pocket, when I'm at home, is not on the list.

But that's me. Others can gauge their own level of risk for themselves and choose accordingly.

I suppose it could happen if the police were on your property for another reason, such as a disturbance of the peace reported by a neighbor. Depending on your appearance and demeanor, the responding officers could perform a Terry frisk for officer safety. If the switchblade is discovered under those circumstances, you would most likely be charged. Terry searches are routine and have been upheld by the courts as lawful.

 

[SimplyMinded]

Just for the sake of complete accuracy-

It's also illegal to carry a switchblade (blade 2" or longer) on ones person on private property, including in ones own home.

This is the result of an Appeals Court ruling from 2009, People v SC (a juvenile court case, so no name of defendant).

Notice how in statute 21510, under part (b), it only says "Carries the knife upon the person", with no mention of public or private property/places. Link-

https://www.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21510.&lawCode=PEN

In People v SC, Mr. SC was found to have a switchblade on his person (in a pocket) while on private property. He was arrested, convicted, and appealed. He tried to argue that the "public place" reference in part (a), which refers to a switchblade in a vehicle in a public place, should also apply to part (b), carrying a switchblade on ones person, and that since he was carrying on private property rather than a public place that his conviction should be overturned.

But the Appeals Court did not agree, ruling that because part (b) doesn't specify public or private property, that it applies to everywhere in the state, including in ones own home.

Here are some quotes from their ruling-

"we conclude the statute is violated any time a person carries a switchblade knife on his or her person, regardless of where the possession occurs".

"A switchblade carried on the person represents a constant threat to others, whether carried in public or in private".

"A switchblade carried at home, for example, is dangerous to family members and house guests during an argument".

This is one of the most boneheaded rulings that I have seen the California Appeals Court make. But on the bright side, there is language in that ruling, that in my opinion, confirms ones legal right to possess "switchblades" (blades 2" or longer), in the state of California.

Here is a link to their ruling- https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

Note: That ruling refers to section 653k, which was the switchblade statute in 2009, California later changed how they numbered penal code statutes. Section 653k was changed to 21510.

I wonder wjy he got searched on his own property.

 

[Jesse B.]

I wonder wjy he got searched on his own property.

https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2009/a123371/

“[…]police were called to a residence in Petaluma to investigate a possible break-in. When the first officer arrived, he found several people in the house. After questioning one of the group, the officer concluded they were there with permission. During this conversation, appellant and three other people left the house through the front door, without any prompting from the officer.
Several other officers had responded to the scene. By the time the second testifying officer arrived, three young men, including appellant, were sitting on the porch, facing a group of officers. The testifying officer decided to search the young men, starting with appellant. He directed appellant to leave the porch and come to where he was standing on the grass. The search revealed a folding knife with a three-inch blade in the pocket of appellant’s shorts. The officer determined the knife blade could be flipped open easily and concluded it was an illegal “switchblade” knife.
The juvenile court found true the allegation that appellant was in possession of a switchblade knife, determined appellant to be a ward of the court, and placed him on probation.”