In re H v. CA6

Filed 11/6/13 In re H.V. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

IN RE H.V., a Person Coming Under the H039634 Juvenile Court Law. (Monterey County Super. Ct. No. J35398)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

H.V.,

Defendant and Appellant.

I. INTRODUCTION The minor, H.V., appeals from the juvenile court’s May 1, 2013 dispositional order declaring him a ward of the court and committing him to the county juvenile ranch following the minor’s admissions that he committed conspiracy to commit robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)1 and attempted robbery (§§ 664, 211). On appeal, the minor challenges a condition of probation that prohibits him from contact with the victim or the victim’s family and requires him to stay at least 100 yards away from the victim and the victim’s residence, vehicle, school, and placement of

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

employment. For reasons that we will explain, we will modify the probation condition to include an explicit knowledge requirement. As so modified, we will affirm the juvenile court’s dispositional order.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND According to the probation report, on December 26, 2012, the minor was involved in the robbery of the victim, L. The incident began when L. (age 16) was approached near a skating rink by three other teenagers, including the minor (age 17), another minor, R.R. (age 17), and 18-year-old John Avery. R.R. told L. to give him $10 and when L. replied that he did not have $10, the minor and the others walked away. L. heard the minor urging R.R. to approach him again. Next, L. was surrounded by the teenagers (the minor, R.R. and Avery). R.R. and Avery searched L.’s pockets and Avery took L.’s cell phone. When L. told R.R. that he had the ability to track the cell phone, R.R. punched L. in the face. L. ran to his residence and informed his father of the incident. L.’s father became involved after he and L. located the minor, Avery, and R.R. When asked about the whereabouts of L.’s cell phone, Avery denied that he had it. L’s father saw that R.R. was holding his own cell phone and grabbed it. R.R. recovered his cell phone by removing L.’s cell phone from his pocket and and handing it to L.’s father in exchange for his cell phone. R.R. and L.’s father then began pushing each other. In the ensuing altercation, L. punched R.R. in the head and Avery punched L. approximately seven times in the back. L. fell and hit his head on a fountain. After L.’s father pulled Avery away from L., the minor, R.R., and Avery fled from the scene. Police officers located the minor and R.R. They did not comply with the officers’ command to stop and get on the ground. Although the minor pulled away from the police officer who had grabbed him and attempted to place him in handcuffs, the officer was