Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re I.S.

California Court of Appeals, First District, First Division

December 8, 2016

In re I.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
I.S., Defendant and Appellant

          Superior Court of San Francisco City and County, No. JW15-6162, Braden C. Woods, Judge.

Page 518

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 519

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 520

          COUNSEL

          Maggie Shrout, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

         Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler and Jeffrey M. Laurence, Assistant Attorneys General, Arthur P. Beever and Christina Vom Saal, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

         Opinion by Banke, J., with Humes, P. J., and Margulies, J., concurring.

          OPINION

          [211 Cal.Rptr.3d 464] BANKE, J.

          The question before us is whether a juvenile court that accepts transfer of an entire delinquency case from another county (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 750), may rule on a Proposition 47 petition to recall the disposition made by the transferor county. Defendant maintains section 750 of the Welfare and Institutions Code confers such power. The People maintain Proposition 47, and specifically the language of Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (a), allows only the transferor court to recall a disposition order. We conclude a transferee juvenile court has the power to rule on a recall petition and therefore reverse the juvenile court's denial of defendant's petition. We also modify one of defendant's probation conditions.

         Background

         In late 2013, in Contra Costa County Juvenile Court, defendant pleaded no contest to felony theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (c)), and the court declared him a ward of the state. About a year later, a new petition alleged defendant unlawfully possessed a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29610), and he again pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor variant of the charge.

         The following year, and just prior to a disposition hearing on the new charge, defendant's case was transferred to the San Francisco Juvenile Court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 750 because his family had moved. The San Francisco Juvenile Court re-declared defendant a ward, chose to place him with his mother, reimposed probation conditions, and kept intact orders of the transferor court.

         A few days later, defendant filed a Proposition 47 petition in the San Francisco Juvenile Court to reduce his felony theft offense to misdemeanor larceny. The San Francisco court denied his petition without prejudice, ruling only the Contra ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.