In re M.Y. CA1/2

Filed 11/25/13 In re M.Y. CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

In re M.Y., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A139078 M.Y., (Solano County Defendant and Appellant. Super. Ct. No. J40979)

I. INTRODUCTION After being made a ward of the court and placed on probation in her mother’s custody in 2011, appellant, now age 17, left her mother’s home without permission or supervision several times, and then admitted the violations of probation to the juvenile court. After two hearings in June 2013, and over the objection of defense counsel, the juvenile court ordered appellant placed at the New Foundations facility. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, she appeals and asks this court to examine the record and determine if there are any significant issues deserving of further briefing. We have done so, find none, and hence affirm the juvenile court’s dispositional order. II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On July 27, 2011, appellant admitted to a violation of Penal Code section 487, subdivision (c), a lesser offense to that originally charged, i.e., a violation of Penal Code

1

section 211 (robbery). On September 7, 2011, she was made a ward of the court, put on probation, and placed in the custody of her mother, who lives in Vallejo. On December 7, 2011, she was reported as having left that home earlier in the week and, as a result, a bench warrant was issued for her. According to the probation report, the mother was concerned that she might be “with a pimp.” Appellant was returned to court pursuant to the bench warrant on November 14, 2012. She admitted the violation of probation and, as a result, on December 7, 2012, the juvenile court ordered wardship continued and appellant returned to her mother’s custody albeit with electronic monitoring for 90 days. However, 10 days later, on December 17, 2012, she again left her mother’s home without permission, and without using the electronic monitor. A bench warrant was thus issued for her. Appellant was arrested on that warrant on May 21, 2013, while at the Solano Mental Health Crisis, and booked into the Juvenile Detention Facility. On May 29, 2013, she admitted the violation of probation, but the case was postponed for a dispositional hearing. That hearing was held on June 12 and 16, 2013. Before the hearing, the Solano County Probation Department recommended that wardship with her mother be continued with the condition that she serve another 30 days with electronic monitoring. It also recommended that appellant continue to attend counseling and parenting classes, which she had started earlier. At the dispositional hearing, however, the prosecution disagreed, and requested that the court commit appellant to the New Foundations Program, because she had become a “prostitute” and was “living with her pimp.” Appellant’s counsel disagreed and urged the court to accept the probation department’s recommendation, noting that “she has started services” at the mental health facility “and they have been a help to her in a way that it hadn’t been before . . . .” Appellant also addressed the court and asserted that she had not recently been engaged in prostitution, that she had a son who was now 10 months old, and that she wanted to “turn myself around” and had not “been selling my body or anything of that [kind] for the last two years. I stopped two years ago.”