Celeste Rivas Hernandez body was found on September 8, 2025, in the front trunk of an impounded Tesla at a Los Angeles tow yard. The vehicle was registered to musician David Anthony Burke, known as D4vd. The Los Angeles County medical examiner later ruled Celeste’s death a homicide caused by multiple penetrating injuries. Burke has been charged in connection with her death and has pleaded not guilty.
Those facts come from different stages of the investigation. The discovery established where Celeste was found. The medical examiner determined how her death was classified. The criminal case concerns who is legally responsible. Keeping those findings separate is essential while the case proceeds through court.
Where was Celeste Rivas Hernandez found?
The Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner says Celeste was discovered at about 11 a.m. on September 8, 2025, in the front trunk of a vehicle at a Los Angeles tow yard. The district attorney’s office later identified the vehicle as a Tesla registered to Burke. It had been impounded after being reported abandoned.
A front trunk, sometimes called a “frunk,” is the storage compartment beneath the hood of an electric vehicle. It is distinct from the rear trunk. That detail matters here because some accounts describe the discovery simply as being “in a car,” leaving readers with an incomplete picture of the confirmed location.
Celeste had previously been reported missing from Lake Elsinore, California. After the discovery, investigators worked to identify the remains and determine what had happened. Early reports could establish the location and the vehicle’s registration, but they could not yet provide a confirmed cause of death or identify a person responsible. Later medical and court developments should not be read back into those first reports as though investigators knew everything in September 2025.
What did the medical examiner determine?
In an April 22, 2026, statement, the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner listed Celeste’s cause of death as multiple penetrating injuries caused by an object or objects. It classified the manner of death as homicide.
“Cause” describes the fatal injury; “manner” classifies the circumstances of a death. A homicide ruling does not, by itself, identify the person who inflicted the injuries or decide a defendant’s guilt. Those questions belong to the criminal investigation and court proceedings.
The department examined Celeste on September 10, 2025, and says it determined the cause and manner of death that December. The findings were released publicly in April 2026 after a court order that had restricted disclosure was lifted. This timeline explains why older articles say the cause of death had not been announced. That was accurate when those articles were published, but it is no longer the latest official finding.
The medical examiner’s public statement does not give an exact date of death. Prosecutors have presented a separate timeline in court, alleging events in April 2025. That allegation should not be mistaken for a date independently established in the medical examiner’s announcement.
Why do reports give Celeste’s age as both 14 and 15?
The differing ages refer to different points in the timeline. Prosecutors describe Celeste as 14 at the time of the alleged killing in 2025. The medical examiner’s April 2026 statement describes her as 15 when discussing the discovery of her body. Reporting by the Associated Press says September 8, the day she was found, would have been her 15th birthday.
Neither age indicates a different victim. A careful account should say which event it means rather than use one number for the entire case.
Was Celeste’s body returned to her family?
Yes. In September 2025, KABC reported that the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner had released Celeste’s body to her family for memorial services. That happened months before the department publicly released its cause-of-death finding.
The two events are separate. Releasing a person’s remains for memorial services does not necessarily mean that every investigative conclusion has been made public.
What is the status of the case against D4vd?
Los Angeles County prosecutors charged Burke in April 2026 with murder, continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 and unlawful mutilation of human remains. These are allegations, not findings that he committed the crimes. His attorneys have denied that he caused Celeste’s death.
Following a preliminary hearing, a judge ruled in July 2026 that the case could proceed to trial. That ruling means the court found sufficient grounds for a trial; it was not a conviction. At an August 31 arraignment, Burke pleaded not guilty. As of October 3, 2026, the case had not reached a verdict.
The medical examiner’s homicide ruling and Burke’s not-guilty plea can both be stated accurately. One is a forensic classification of Celeste’s death. The other is Burke’s position on the criminal charges. Readers should be cautious of posts that collapse those separate facts into a claim that a trial has already settled the case.
What about claims circulating online?
This case has attracted speculation, including claims about the condition of Celeste’s body. The Los Angeles Police Department specifically said that reports claiming her body had been frozen before its discovery were false. Other circulating claims should be checked against named officials, medical findings or evidence presented in court before being repeated as fact.
The confirmed account is already grave without graphic images or unsupported theories. Celeste’s family has described her as a girl who loved singing, dancing and Friday movie nights with them. Their words are a reminder that the person at the center of the case was more than the circumstances in which she was found.
