IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
March 10, 2011
IN RE D.N., A PERSON COMING UNDER THE JUVENILE COURT LAW. THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
D.N., DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
(Super. Ct. No. JV123807)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Blease, J.
In re D.N.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
The 17-year-old minor had been the subject of a series of sustained petitions when, in 2009, he admitted a violation of probation, a new allegation that he used force and violence on a person while on school property. (Pen. Code, § 243.2, subd. (a).) The juvenile court continued the minor as a ward of the court, granted him probation, and ordered him committed to out-of-state placement in a residential treatment facility.
The minor appeals, claiming the juvenile court erred by failing to specify the amount of predisposition custody credits to which he was entitled. Accepting the People's concession on this claim, we shall remand the matter to the juvenile court for the limited purpose of calculating the minor's predisposition custody credits and, otherwise, affirm.*fn1
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In 2004, the minor was adjudged a ward of the court in Butte County following a finding that he had committed assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) and vandalism. (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a).) Over the ensuing years, additional petitions were sustained against the minor, involving a variety of offenses and probation violations.
In 2006, proceedings then pending against the minor were transferred to Sacramento County, where the minor's mother was living, and the minor again was granted probation. The minor continued to engage in law violations and to violate his probation.
In 2009, the current petition was filed, alleging the minor again had violated his probation, this time by threatening a school security guard (Pen. Code, § 71), obstructing a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)), and using force or violence against a person while on school property. (Pen. Code, § 243.2, subd. (a).) At the detention hearing, the minor was ordered detained in juvenile hall.
At a subsequent hearing, the minor admitted using force or violence while on school property, and the remaining allegations were dismissed. The juvenile court granted the minor probation, with credit for the 58 days he had served during his most recent detention in juvenile hall, and ordered him committed to the care of the probation department for out-of-state placement in a residential treatment facility. The court pronounced the minor's maximum confinement time but failed to designate the amount of predisposition custody credit to which he was entitled.
The minor claims, and the People concede, that the juvenile court erred by failing to calculate predisposition custody credits in this matter to include custody time from previous petitions that were utilized in the court's calculation of the minor's maximum confinement time. We accept the People's concession in this regard and shall remand the matter for this purpose. (See In re Eric J. (1979) 25 Cal.3d 522, 536; In re Emilio C. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1058, 1067-1068.)
The matter is remanded with directions to the juvenile court to calculate the amount of predisposition custody credit to which the minor is entitled, to include time spent in custody on previous petitions considered by the court in arriving at the minor's maximum confinement time. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.
We concur: RAYE, P. J. MAURO, J.