LOS ANGELES, CA – A Lakewood special education teacher is facing misdemeanor child abuse allegations involving three students with disabilities after the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department investigated reports that he was physically aggressive with children in his classroom during the 2025-26 school year.
The teacher, Yaun Has, worked with transitional kindergarten and kindergarten students in a special education classroom at Cleveland Elementary School in Lakewood, which is part of the Long Beach Unified School District.
The allegations involve three different students, according to information provided by Los Angeles County sheriff’s officials. The case was submitted to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office on September 4 for review, while the school district later placed Has on administrative leave.
The available information does not establish that Has committed the alleged conduct, and the case remains under investigation.
Reports began with concerns about a nonspeaking autistic child
The investigation began after a teacher’s aide contacted the Sheriff’s Department on May 8, reporting that Has had allegedly been physically aggressive with a nonspeaking autistic student, according to sheriff’s officials.
Authorities subsequently received reports involving two additional students in the same classroom on May 19.
Sgt. Joe Ramos of the Sheriff’s Department’s Special Victims Bureau described the alleged behavior as going beyond what would ordinarily be considered appropriate physical intervention by a teacher attempting to control a child.
Investigators then assigned a detective to the case and began interviewing people who could provide information about what happened inside the classroom.
The allegations are particularly significant because the students involved were described as having disabilities that could limit their ability to communicate what happened to them.
One parent who spoke publicly about the investigation said her child has limited communication abilities and that the child began displaying behavioral changes during the period when the alleged incidents were occurring. Those observations, however, are the parent’s account and have not been independently established as evidence that the alleged abuse caused those changes.
The investigation itself remains the basis for determining what occurred.
Teacher was removed, then returned to classroom
One of the central developments in the case is the timeline of Has’ employment.
According to reporting based on information from investigators and the school district, Has was removed from the classroom in May after the allegations surfaced. Substitute teachers reportedly covered the classroom for the remainder of the school year.
However, Has returned to Cleveland Elementary when the new school year began in August.
The school’s own official records provide independent confirmation that Has had been a teacher at Cleveland Elementary. The school’s 2025-26 School Site Council page lists Yaun Has as a teacher with a term extending through June 2027.
That official school record is significant in establishing that Has was part of the Cleveland Elementary staff during the school year in which the allegations arose.
The Sheriff’s Department subsequently submitted its case to prosecutors on September 4. On September 7, Long Beach Unified placed Has on administrative leave, according to the district’s communication to families.
The district has characterized the matter as a confidential personnel issue and has not publicly released detailed information about its internal review.
District says teacher remains on administrative leave
Long Beach Unified said Has remains on administrative leave while the district reviews allegations of physical abuse involving students during the 2025-26 school year.
The district has also said it cannot provide additional details because the matter involves confidential personnel information.
The distinction between the criminal investigation and the district’s personnel review is important.
The Sheriff’s Department is responsible for investigating potential criminal conduct and submitted its case to prosecutors. The school district, meanwhile, has its own employment responsibilities involving the teacher’s status and the safety of students on campus.
At the time of the latest available information, Has had not been arrested and was not in custody.
Because the allegations involve misdemeanor charges, sheriff’s officials said he was expected to receive a charging notice and surrender to court rather than being taken into custody immediately.
That means references to the teacher being “arrested” in an earlier communication to families were incorrect. The district subsequently clarified the situation, according to the reporting surrounding the case.
What California requires when school employees suspect abuse
The case also highlights the separate legal obligations California places on educators and other school employees when they suspect a child is being abused.
The California Department of Education’s child-abuse reporting guidelines state that school and district employees are mandated reporters under California law.
The requirement does not mean a teacher or aide must prove that abuse occurred before making a report. The state says a mandated reporter must act when there is reasonable suspicion that a child may have been abused or neglected.
That distinction matters in investigations such as the Lakewood case.
A report to law enforcement is not itself proof that abuse occurred. Instead, the reporting requirement is designed to ensure that allegations involving children are referred to authorities capable of investigating them.
The California Department of Education also states that a mandated reporter’s responsibility is not satisfied simply by telling a school supervisor. Reports must be made to an appropriate law-enforcement agency or county child-welfare agency.
The state specifically identifies teachers, school employees and administrators among those subject to mandated-reporting requirements.
California’s guidelines also say that school districts and county offices of education do not conduct the criminal investigation into child-abuse allegations. That responsibility belongs to the appropriate law-enforcement or child-welfare authorities.
Cleveland Elementary’s student-safety policies
Cleveland Elementary’s official website also provides information about procedures for reporting concerns involving students.
The school’s Safe Place to Learn information explains parents’ and students’ rights regarding complaints involving school safety, discrimination, harassment and other concerns.
The page also states that school facilities must be safe and maintained in good repair and provides information about the district’s complaint procedures.
Those policies are separate from the criminal investigation into Has. They do, however, illustrate the broader system through which parents and students can raise concerns about conditions at a public school.
For families of children receiving special education services, communication can be particularly important because some students may have limited ability to independently describe an interaction with an adult.
That does not establish that any particular behavior occurred in this case, but it helps explain why reports from classroom aides, other employees and parents can become important sources of information in investigations involving students with communication disabilities.
Investigation remains unresolved
Authorities have not publicly released a detailed account of every alleged incident involving the three students.
The available information indicates that investigators received separate reports involving three children, conducted interviews and submitted the case to the District Attorney’s Office for review.
The Sheriff’s Department has also asked anyone who believes their child may have been abused by Has to contact the Lakewood Sheriff’s Station or another appropriate law-enforcement agency.
The district has said it is cooperating with law enforcement while conducting its own review.
At this stage, the allegations remain allegations. No conviction has been reported, and the available information does not establish what the eventual outcome of the criminal case will be.
The case also illustrates the difference between an accusation, a law-enforcement investigation and a criminal conviction. Prosecutors must independently determine whether charges should be pursued, while a court would ultimately determine whether the allegations are proven if the matter proceeds to trial.
For now, Has remains on administrative leave, the Sheriff’s Department’s investigation has been referred to prosecutors, and the circumstances involving the three students remain under review.
