In re S.M. CA2/2

Filed 3/7/14 In re S.M. CA2/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

In re S.M., a Person Coming Under the B249293 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KJ37945)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

S.M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Geanene Yriarte, Judge. Affirmed as modified.

Mary Bernstein, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette and Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorneys General, Scott A. Taryle and Michael C. Keller, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Appellant S.M. (minor) appeals from an order of the juvenile court placing her on informal probation for six months. She challenges the three drug related terms of her probation and contends that the juvenile court erred in relying on a hearsay statement in the probation report filed in a previous case. We agree that the condition requiring blood tests of minor was unauthorized, though we reject minor’s remaining contentions. We find the appeal is not moot, and we affirm the judgment as modified. BACKGROUND After a petition was filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602,1 alleging that minor had committed a misdemeanor battery while on school, hospital, or park grounds, minor admitted the allegation. On May 7, 2013, without declaring the minor a ward of the juvenile court, the court placed minor on informal probation for six months as authorized by section 725, subdivision (a), and scheduled a progress hearing for November 5, 2013. Among other conditions of probation, the juvenile court ordered minor to “cooperate in a plan to control the abuse of alcohol, controlled substances, or poisons”; to “submit to urinalysis and skin checks as directed by the probation officer to detect the use of narcotics and controlled substances”; and to “submit to testing of blood, breath, or urine to detect the use of alcohol, narcotics, controlled substances, or poisons whenever requested by any peace officer.” Minor filed a timely notice of appeal. DISCUSSION I. Mootness Respondent contends that minor’s appeal is moot, because the six-month probationary period has passed and the probation order was “set to expire by its own terms on November 5, 2013.” We agree that six months have elapsed since minor was placed on probation; however we are unable to find the probation order’s “own terms”