A 14-year-old boy who allegedly was sexually molested by a female guidance counselor can't sue his school even if it was negligent in hiring and supervising her, a state appeals court has ruled.

The youth, identified only as C.A., claimed the counselor at Golden Valley High School in Santa Clarita (Los Angeles County) sexually harassed and molested him many times between January and September 2007.

The suit also claimed that the William S. Hart High School District knew the counselor had done similar things with other minors.

The suit was filed four months after the same counselor, Roselyn Hubbell, was arrested at a motel with another youth. She pleaded no contest in February 2009 to a misdemeanor molestation charge and was placed on probation, according to the district attorney's office.

The district's lawyer in C.A.'s case, Stephen Harber, denied any negligence, saying Hubbell was "appropriately hired and appropriately supervised."

The appeals court, in a 2-1 ruling, said that was beside the point because no state law authorizes a damage claim against a school district for negligently hiring, supervising or training an employee.

Presiding Justice Robert Mallano wrote an indignant dissent, saying a school district that hires a "child molester to be a guidance counselor" should be held responsible for the harm she causes.

Vince Finaldi, a lawyer for C.A., said he would appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"Kids have a mandatory duty to go to school," Finaldi said. "What this ruling says is that if they happen to be sexually abused by a teacher or counselor ... and they knew or should have known what was going on, you can't sue the school."

The district's lawyer, saw the case differently.

"The obligation of a school is to adequately supervise students," Harber said.

"A school can't and shouldn't be responsible for what happens someplace off campus on a Saturday night. There must be student responsibility and parental involvement."

- Bob Egelko

SAN FRANCISCO

Inmate caught in federal catch-22

Alexander Dejarnette has spent most of the last decade in prison for sending women from the Bay Area to Las Vegas to work as prostitutes, and for violating his parole.

Now the San Francisco man is looking at another prison term for failing to register as a sex offender - something he says a federal prosecutor promised him he wouldn't have to do.

Dejarnette pleaded guilty in October 2000 to violating the federal Mann Act by transporting women across state lines for prostitution. If he committed the same crime today, federal law would require him to report to police once a year, for the rest of his life, after his release.

But his lawyer said it wasn't clear at the time whether either federal sex offender guidelines or California's reporting law applied to Dejarnette's crime. At his sentencing hearing, a prosecutor said the government wouldn't insist that Dejarnette agree to lifetime registration as a condition of his future release.

Dejarnette got out of prison in September 2006. Two months earlier, a federal law took effect that required anyone convicted of a federal sex crime, including the Mann Act, to register with police for life.

Dejarnette's probation officer ordered him to register, but he refused. By February 2009, he was back behind bars for unrelated parole violations and facing a new federal indictment for failing to register - punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston dismissed the indictment in February 2010. She said the prosecutor had promised Dejarnette that he would not have to register as a federal sex offender, so it would be "fundamentally unfair" to impose that requirement now.

The government appealed, and on Monday it won a ruling that reinstated the indictment.

As far as the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was concerned, any promises the government made to Dejarnette applied only to the laws in effect at the time.

Now the prosecution only has to prove that Dejarnette knowingly failed to register as a sex offender. Then it would be up to Illston, the judge who threw out his indictment, to sentence him.

- Bob Egelko