.
Feedback

Sheriff’s Blotter: Juvenile Arrested After Items Stolen from Vehicle

The following information was provided by the San Diego Sheriff’s Department. The suspects have not been convicted of a crime.

Incidents of note from the press board at the .

Monday, Feb. 19

A car valued at $1,500 was reported stolen in the 400 block of La Veta Avenue.

A residential burglary was reported in the 100 block of Hillcrest Drive. Items valued at $2,262 were reported stolen.

A bicycle valued at $7,500 was reported stolen in the 400 block of Pescado Place.

A residential burglary was reported in the 1800 block of Wandering Road. A bicycle, tools and athletic equipment valued at $2,730 were reported stolen.

A tool valued at $200 was reported stolen in the 400 block of Villa Blanca Court.

Tuesday, Feb. 20

A 27-year-old male was arrested for felony possession of a controlled substance in the 1400 block of N. Vulcan Avenue just after midnight.

A purse and $400 in currency were reported stolen from a residence in the 1000 block of Stratford Drive.

Tools valued at $1,963 were reported stolen in the 1600 block of Villa Cardiff Drive.

A juvenile was detained for possession of smoking paraphernalia around 1:15 p.m. in the 1900 block of Avenida Joaquin, and released at 2:45 p.m.

A vehicle burglary was reported in the 1700 block of Neptune Avenue. Items valued at $9,397 were reported stolen.

A utility trailer valued at $1,000 was reported stolen in the 200 block of Leucadia Boulevard.

A vehicle burglary was reported in the 700 block of Regal Road. Items valued at $2,210 were reported stolen.

A 58-year-old male was arrested for grand theft in the 400 block of S. Coast Highway 101 around 5 p.m. A backpack valued at $2,000 was recovered.  

Items valued at $4,380 were reported stolen from a vehicle in the 100 block of Mozart Avenue.

Wednesday, Feb. 21

A television and other items with a combined value of $760 were reported stolen from a Holiday Inn in the 1600 block of Villa Cardiff Drive.

Documents were reported stolen from a residence in the 3100 block of Lone Jack Road. 

Thursday, Feb. 22

A $50 cell phone belonging to the City of Encinitas was reported stolen from a vehicle in the 1100 block of Oakcrest Park Drive.

A 53-year-old female was arrested for being drunk in public in the 200 block of El Portal Street just before midnight.

A juvenile was arrested for exhibiting deadly weapon other than a firearm, possession of a controlled substance and petty theft from a vehicle, all misdemeanors, in the 800 block of Del Rio Avenue around 1:20 a.m. A wallet, credit card and identification were recovered. The juvenile was armed with a lethal cutting instrument. A 19-year-old male was also arrested for being drunk in public.

Credit cards, identification and $150 in cash were reported stolen from a vehicle in the 1300 block of S. Coast Highway 101.

Friday, Feb. 23

A 22-year-old male was arrested for felony possession of a controlled substance on S. Vulcan Avenue at E. D Street just before 11 a.m.

The theft of $50 in currency was shoplifted from Starbucks in the 1500 block of Leucadia Avenue.

A burglary was reported in the 500 block of Quail Gardens Drive. Items valued at $6,090 were reported stolen.

A 24-year-old man was arrested for driving with a suspended or revoked license with a prior DUI conviction in the 800 block of Saxony Road.

A computer and other items with a combined value of $1,875 were reported stolen from a vehicle in the 300 block of Liszt Avenue.

A 22-year-old male was cited and released for soliciting without a permit around 8:30 p.m. in the 1400 block of Via Terrassa.

A 53-year-old female was arrested for being drunk in public in the 200 block of El Portal Street just after midnight.

Saturday, Feb. 24

A computer valued at $1,000 was reported stolen from a vehicle in the 2100 block of Orinda Drive.

A 30-year-old female was arrested for felony possession of a controlled substance in the 1500 block of N. Coast Highway 101 around 10 a.m.

The theft of items valued at $720 was reported in the 800 block of Birmingham Drive from Valero Gas and Pick Up Propane.

A 49-year-old female was arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance in the 400 block of Fourth Street around 12:30 p.m.

A battery on a person was reported in the 1200 block of Loch Lomond Drive. A 23-year-old female suffered a minor injury, according to a report.

A 44-year-old male was arrested for being drunk in public in the 800 block of S. Coast Highway 101 around 7:30 p.m.

Two females, age 21 and 19, suffered minor injuries during a simple battery in the 200 block of N. Coast Highway 101 around 9:45 p.m.

A salon was vandalized in the 200 block of N. Coast Highway 101. Damage was estimated at $399.

A juvenile was detained for possessing smoking paraphernalia and breaking curfew just before midnight on Park Dale Lane at Village Run East. The juvenile was released at 12:30 a.m.

Sunday, Feb. 25

A 31-year-old male was arrested for being drunk in public around 1 a.m. in the 100 block of W. D Street.

A 26-year-old male was arrested for begin drunk in public just before 3:30 a.m. in the 500 block of El Camino Real.

An item valued at $149.97 was reported stolen from Target on N. El Camino Real.

A 34-year-old female was cited and released for shoplifting from Kohl’s on N. El Camino Real. Jewelry, shoes and clothing valued at $311.50 were recovered.

A stolen car was recovered on N. Vulcan Avenue at Ashbury Street.

A 22-year-old female was arrested for being drunk in public and resisting around 5 p.m. on Saxony Road at Encinitas Boulevard.

A call about a disturbance just after 8:30 p.m. in the 100 block of N. El Camino Real led to the arrest of a 36-year-old male for being drunk in public.

An 18-year-old male was arrested for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, possession of a controlled substance and possession of concentrated cannabis, all felonies, and misdemeanor contributing to the delinquency of a minor on Park Dale Lane at Village Run East around 11 p.m.

A call about a suspicious person led to the arrest of an 18-year-old male for being under the influence of a controlled substance in the 1000 block of N. Vulcan Avenue around 11 p.m.

Monday, Feb. 26

A computer valued at $600 was reported stolen from a vehicle in the 2000 block of Cambridge Avenue.

A simple battery was reported in the 700 block of Regal Road around 8 a.m. A 43-year-old male suffered a minor injury, according to a report.

A 51-year-old female was cited and released for misdemeanor shoplifting from Home Goods on the 200 block of N. El Camino Real.

A camera valued at $300 and other items were reported stolen from a vehicle on Briggs Avenue.

Tuesday, Feb. 27

Vandalism was reported in the 600 block of Birmingham Drive. Damage to building material was estimated at $3,000.

The theft of $63 worth of gasoline was reported by U-Haul in the 2900 block of Manchester Avenue.

A 47-year-old male was arrested for being drunk in public around 7 p.m. in the 300 block of S. Coast Highway 101.

A purse, electronics and cash were reported stolen from a vehicle in the 800 block of Marisa Lane.

A purse was reported stolen from a vehicle in the 400 block of Santa Fe Drive.   

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
gay_wayland June 16, 2013 at 06:20 am
when and where is the sale? Where should donations be taken?
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
The benefit garage and bake sale is this Saturday, June 22 from 7 a.m. to noon at 1463 Golden SunsetRead More Drive in San Marcos (San Elijo Hills). Here's the link to the event: http://encinitas.patch.com/groups/events/p/drake-center-garage-sale-to-benefit-autism-therapy-dog_3a2145e8
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
All donated items can be dropped off at The Drake Center, located at 195 N. El Camino Real inRead More Encinitas.
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
Status Quo June 19, 2013 at 11:53 am
Looks very much like your Prop A will pass, though 'BA2's tactic seems to be part of the problemRead More also.
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits. "In the 26-yearRead More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative! Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause." We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.