Skip to content
Name: In re Ramon M.
Case #: G040765
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 10/22/2009

A minor was improperly held in and committed to county jail based on a juvenile adjudication. In 2005, the then 16-year-old minor Ramon M. became a ward of the court and was released on probation after conviction of crimes related to gang activity. He was in and out of custody for subsequent gang offenses, and turned 18 in October, 2007. In June, 2008, a petition was filed alleging probation violations. Ramon was detained in the county jail pending disposition by the juvenile court, and was subsequently committed to the county jail for 365 days. On appeal, Ramon argued that the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Luis F.
Case #: A123599
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 08/31/2009

A probation condition requiring a minor to continue taking all prescribed medications was lawful but required modification. The minor appealed from an order of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 declaring him a ward based on a attempted robbery. He was placed on probation, a condition of which was that he continue to take prescribed medications (Prozac and Klonopin, for anxiety and depression). On appeal, he contended that the probation conditions were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The appellate court found the issue waived for failure to object below. However, the court elected to address the merits of…

View Full Summary
Name: In re L.M.
Case #: A124299
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 09/09/2009

The juvenile court properly denied father's motion for travel costs to visit a delinquent minor where insufficient evidence was provided to the court. The 12-year-old minor was declared a court ward under section 602 and placed in a residential treatment center several hundred miles away from his home. The goal of his case plan was reunification with his father, and monthly visitation was ordered. The minor filed a motion to compel the probation department to pay for his father's transportation costs to the monthly visits. The motion was denied, and the minor appealed. The appellate court concluded that a juvenile…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Spencer S.
Case #: G040560
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 08/21/2009

The exclusion of juvenile misdemeanants from deferred entry of judgment (DEJ), under Welfare and Institutions Code section 790 et seq., is not unconstitutional because there is a rational basis for denying misdemeanants the benefits of the program. A juvenile court sustained a petition alleging misdemeanor battery, declared the minor a court ward, and placed him on formal probation. On appeal, the minor contended that exclusion of misdemeanants, such as himself, from DEJ violated his right to equal protection of laws. Section 790, requires a minor be a first-time felony offender charged with a crime that is not listed in section…

View Full Summary
Name: In re R.O.
Case #: B208117
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 08/25/2009

Welfare and Institutions Code section 731, subdivision (c), which requires the court to consider the "facts and circumstances of the matter," gives the juvenile court discretion to select a period of confinement that is less than the minimum mandatory indeterminate sentence. The juvenile court sustained a petition against the minor alleging first degree murder and use of a firearm, and committed him to DJF. Believing that it had no discretion in setting the term at anything less than than the indeterminate sentence applicable to an adult convicted of the same offense, it set the maximum period at 35 years. Interpreting…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Julian R.
Case #: S159282
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 08/17/2009

A juvenile court need not orally pronounce a minor's maximum period of confinement; a written statement of the commitment term is sufficient. Further, on a silent record, it will presumed that the juvenile court performed its duty under Welfare and Institutions Code section 731, subdivision (c), to consider the facts and circumstances of the offense in setting the maximum period of confinement. The minor admitted committing two assaults by force likely to produce great bodily injury, and two criminal street gang enhancements. The court initially placed the minor on probation, but later revoked probation and committed the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re H.C.
Case #: H033669
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/14/2009

Where a condition of probation implicates constitutional rights, the condition must be narrowly drawn and sufficiently precise so as to provide notice to probationer as to the prohibited activity. Minor admitted possession of a concealed weapon (Pen. Code. sec. 1202.5, subd. (a)(2)) and was placed on three years probation with conditions ordering him not to associate with probationers, parolees, or gang members, and not to frequent areas of gang activity or participate in gang activity. Because the conditions do not satisfy the requirement that minor be possessed of knowledge, they were unconstitutionally vague and must be modified to provide…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.B.
Case #: F055289
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/18/2009

A juvenile may be committed to DJF for a probation violation found pursuant to section 777, subdivision (a)(2) where the offense for which the ward received probation is a DJF-eligible offense. The minor was on probation based on a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition alleging assault and participating in a criminal street gang. He was then charged in a pleading titled "Juvenile Wardship Petition Welf. & Inst. Code 602/777," in which a probation violation was alleged along with an allegation of a new criminal offense. The minor admitted a probation violation not amounting to a crime. (Welf. &…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Eddie L.
Case #: C059237
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 07/02/2009

Welfare and Institutions Code, section 726, subdivision (c) does not require juvenile court to make a discretionary determination regarding a minor's maximum confinement period when a minor is not committed to DJF. The juvenile court sustained an armed robbery charge against the minor, continued him as a ward of the court, and committed him to the Boys Ranch. On appeal, he contended that remand was required for the juvenile court to make a discretionary determination of his maximum period of confinement as provided in Welfare and Institutions Code section 726, subdivision (c). The appellate court rejected the argument. The plain…

View Full Summary
Name: Alex O. v. Superior Court
Case #: D053979
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 05/27/2009

A condition of probation imposed by the juvenile court which restricted the re-entry of the juvenile, a U.S. citizen living in Mexico, to the United States is essentially banishment and is unconstitutional as it did not relate to the crime committed or to future criminality. Alex O., an American citizen, had lived in Mexico with his mother, a Mexican citizen, for approximately three and a half years. He had no significant relationship with his father, an American citizen, who resided in the United States. In 2008, 17-year-old Alex O. attempted to enter the United States at the border crossing but…

View Full Summary