Skip to content
Name: In re N.C.
Case #: A154725
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 08/26/2019

Minor’s commitment to the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) was appropriate where juvenile court found less restrictive placements would be ineffective. The minor and another minor, G.K., were charged with committing a number of serious sexual offenses against an intoxicated woman. N.C. was adjudged a ward of the court and committed to DJJ. The minor appealed the commitment. Held: Affirmed. Rehabilitation is one of the primary objectives of juvenile court law. As such, it contemplates a progressively more restrictive and punitive series of dispositions, starting with home placement under supervision, progressing to foster care, then placement in a local treatment…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.M.
Case #: A154878
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 08/06/2019

Where there was evidence describing the programs offered by the Department of Juvenile Facilities (DJF), it was not an abuse of discretion for the juvenile court to conclude that a commitment to DJF would benefit the minor. A.M., a 16-year-old minor, admitted an allegation in a juvenile delinquency petition that he committed a murder. The probation report concluded there was a low likelihood that A.M. could be successfully rehabilitated in any of the least restrictive options available through probation. At the disposition hearing, an intake and court liaison employee with DJF described the intake process when a youth is…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.R.
Case #: D072389
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 06/28/2018

Juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by committing the minor, who had a long criminal history and had previously received less restrictive placements, to the Department of Corrections, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). The minor had a lengthy history with the juvenile justice system. His latest Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition was based on a sustained allegation of robbery. At a contested disposition hearing the juvenile court ordered placement at DJJ. The minor appealed, arguing there was no substantial evidence of probable benefit from the DJJ commitment or that less restrictive alternatives would be ineffective or inappropriate.…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Carlos J.
Case #: A151369
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 04/10/2018

Juvenile court's commitment of ward to the Department of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) reversed where the appellate record did not contain substantial evidence of probable benefit to the minor from the commitment. In February 2017, the minor admitted allegations in a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition that he committed an assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)) for the benefit of a gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)). The admission was based on an incident where the minor and an older male participated in a gang-related shooting. Following a contested dispositional hearing, the minor was…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.O.
Case #: B282149
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 12/12/2017

Juvenile court did not have authority to dismiss a count in a juvenile delinquency petition post-disposition so the minor would be eligible for commitment to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF). The minor admitted allegations in a May 2014 Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition that he committed a robbery, and several weeks later, resisted an executive officer. He was declared a ward and placed on probation. Subsequently, allegations the minor had violated probation were found true and the trial court ordered the minor committed to DJF. This commitment order was rejected because the minor's most recent offense, resisting…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Calvin S.
Case #: B265382
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 11/15/2016

Juvenile court abused its discretion by committing minor to DJF without considering placement in juvenile hall. After sustaining allegations that 14-year-old Calvin S. committed assault with a firearm and assault with intent to commit a sexual offense, the juvenile court adjudged him a ward and committed him to DJF. Calvin appealed, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by committing him to DJF rather than placing him in a less restrictive local setting, like juvenile hall, where he could continue to receive services to address his developmental disability. Held: Reversed and remanded for a new disposition hearing. "A DJF…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.L.
Case #: A142299
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 12/16/2015

Juvenile court properly committed minor to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) where minor committed an offense that was eligible for DJF commitment and an offense that was not eligible for DJF commitment simultaneously. M.L. admitted allegations in a juvenile delinquency petition that he committed a robbery and possessed a concealable firearm. He was committed to DJF. On appeal, M.L. claimed his "most recent offense," was possession of a concealable firearm, which is ineligible for a DJF commitment (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 733, subd. (c)). Held: Affirmed. A DJF commitment is prohibited where the minor had been adjudged…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Dokins
Case #: B250572
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 10/30/2015
Subsequent History: Review granted 2/17/2016: S231052

Trial court's failure to consider the factors discussed in Miller v. Alabama (2012) 132 S.Ct. 2455, before sentencing a juvenile defendant who committed homicide to de facto LWOP mandates reversal and remand for resentencing. Dokins was 15 years old when he shot an adult and a child, killing the baby. Dokins was tried as an adult and convicted of first degree murder, attempted murder, gun use enhancements, and other offenses. He was sentenced to 90 years to life in prison. On appeal, he made an Eighth Amendment challenge to his sentence. Held: Reversed in part and remanded. In Miller, the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Albert W.
Case #: C073744
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 09/11/2015

When determining whether a delinquent is eligible for commitment to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) under Welfare and Institutions Code section 733, the "most recent sustained petition" does not include petitions filed in other states. In 2008, minor Albert admitted an allegation in a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition that he committed second degree robbery. He was thereafter sent to live with his father in Louisiana, where Louisiana delinquency petitions alleging various offenses were sustained against him. The minor returned to his mother in California, where he was charged with a number of violations of probation (VOP).…

View Full Summary
Name: Ruelas v. Superior Court
Case #: H039848
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/20/2015

Juvenile's equal protection challenge to his mandatory sex offender registration for a violation of Penal Code section 647.6 fails. In 1994, at age 14, Ruleas admitted committing misdemeanor annoying or molesting a child (Pen. Code, § 647.6) and was adjudged a ward, but he was not committed to the Youth Authority (now the Division of Juvenile Facilities) at this time. Three years later, Ruleas committed three non-sex offenses and the juvenile court committed him to the Youth Authority. The term included 4 months for the section 647.6 offense and this triggered mandatory sex offender registration upon Ruleas’ release under Penal…

View Full Summary