In re Ernest M. CA5

Filed 10/30/14 In re Ernest M. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re ERNEST M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE, F068457

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. JJD067143)

v. OPINION ERNEST M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Juliet L. Boccone, Judge. R. Randall Riccardo, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Rebecca Whitfield, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Kane, J. and Detjen, J.

-ooOoo- The court found that appellant, Ernest M., was a person described in Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 after it sustained allegations charging him with shooting at an inhabited dwelling (count 1/Pen. Code, § 246)1 and found true a gang enhancement (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)) in that count. On November 15, 2013, the court set appellant’s maximum term of confinement at 11 years and committed him to the Tulare County Youth Facility for 365 days. The court also placed appellant on probation on certain terms and conditions. On appeal, appellant contends: 1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his adjudication for shooting into an inhabited dwelling; the evidence is insufficient to sustain the gang enhancement; and 3) three of his probation conditions are unconstitutionally vague. We will find merit to this last contention and modify the probation conditions at issue. In all other respects, we will affirm. FACTS On September 4, 2013, the district attorney filed a petition charging appellant with shooting at an inhabited dwelling (count 1), a gang enhancement in that count, and possession of live ammunition by a minor (§ 29650). Appellant’s adjudication hearing was held on October 23, 2013. At this hearing, the prosecution evidence established that on August 31, 2013, at approximately 2:00 a.m., Guadalupe Arteaga was sleeping in her home on Teddy Street in Farmersville when she was awakened by the sound of gunshots. She soon discovered that a bullet had struck the front door and another bullet had struck the front bedroom of the house. Two spent .380 caliber shell casings were recovered at the scene of the shooting. Farmersville Police Officer Josh Weatherbie responded to the area where the shooting occurred and drove around looking for suspects. As he drove westbound on