In re D.D. CA2/3
Filed 1/21/14 In re D.D. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
In re D.D., a Person Coming Under the B248292 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NJ25747)
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
D.D.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John C. Lawson II, Judge. Modified and, as so modified, affirmed. Lynette Gladd Moore, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, and Margaret E. Maxwell, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
D.D., a minor, appeals an order continuing him as a ward of the state under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, following the juvenile court’s finding he committed second degree robbery. He contends the court erred by imposing an unconstitutionally vague probation condition. D.D.’s contention has merit. Accordingly, we modify the probation condition and otherwise affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 22, 2013, 12-year-old Cristian P. was walking home from a Long Beach bus stop when D.D. and a companion approached and asked if Cristian knew what time it was. Cristian checked the time on his cellular telephone. The youths then followed Cristian and demanded that he give them the telephone. Frightened, Cristian pulled the phone from his pocket, saying, “ ‘Okay, just don’t hurt me.’ ” One of the robbers grabbed the phone. D.D.’s companion punched Cristian in the face. D.D. and his accomplice then fled with the phone. On February 25, 2013, the People filed a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging that D.D. committed second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.) On April 9, 2013, following a contested hearing, the juvenile court sustained the petition, ordered that D.D. remain a ward of the state, and ordered him placed in the camp-community placement program for one year, with a maximum confinement period of six years eight months. It imposed a restitution fine and ordered D.D. to pay $600 in direct victim restitution. The juvenile court also imposed a variety of probation conditions. At the adjudication, the prosecutor observed that D.D.’s accomplice in the charged robbery was a member of the Baby Insane Crips criminal street gang. The juvenile court advised D.D. the robbery was a “strike,” and that to avoid future incarceration, “you are going to have to change your life now, which means you cannot be hanging around Baby Insane gang members and think that is okay. [¶] You cannot be hanging out with Baby Insane gang members . . . .” The court orally ordered D.D. to “stay away from, and not claim . . . Baby Insane criminal street gang.” After orally pronouncing the probation conditions, the juvenile court stated: “Change your life. Decide you are going to stop hanging out
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)