In re E.W. CA3
Filed 6/30/15 In re E.W. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----
In re E.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C077534 Law.
THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. No. JV135935)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
E.W.,
Defendant and Appellant.
The minor E.W. appeals following the juvenile court’s order terminating her nonwardship probation pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 725, subdivision (a), and declaring her a ward of the court.1 Her contention on appeal is that the juvenile court violated her statutory and due process rights when it issued the above order without providing her notice or a contested hearing.
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
1
We conclude the juvenile court properly terminated the minor’s nonwardship probation but that it erred when it subsequently declared her a ward of the court without providing the requisite contested dispositional hearing. Therefore, we affirm the juvenile court’s order revoking the minor’s nonwardship probation, but we reverse the juvenile court’s order declaring the minor a ward of the court and placing her on probation, and remand the matter for a contested dispositional hearing. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In a juvenile wardship petition filed March 4, 2014, pursuant to section 602, subdivision (a), it was alleged the minor had brought a knife to school (Pen. Code, § 626.10, subd. (a)) and had twice been cited for fare evasion (Pen. Code, § 640, subd. (c)(1)). On April 2, 2014, the minor admitted possessing a knife at school, which was deemed by the juvenile court to be a misdemeanor, and the juvenile court deemed the minor a person described in section 602 and placed her on probation for a period of six months pursuant to section 725, subdivision (a). The conditions of her probation required the minor to complete 30 hours of community service within five months, and to complete an alcohol/drug assessment and any counseling deemed necessary as a result of the assessment. The juvenile court notified the minor she must provide proof of completion of the probation conditions at the compliance review hearing scheduled for September 15, 2014, and stated, “[w]hat’s going to happen [at the hearing] is if you’ve done your community service, your counseling, no other issues [sic] you will be off probation and good to go.” At the September 15, 2014, compliance review hearing, the minor reported she had completed 14 of the 30 ordered hours of community service and had not completed the alcohol/drug assessment, but minor’s counsel was hopeful the minor would obtain the assessment prior to the October 2, 2014, deadline. At the request of minor’s counsel, the juvenile court continued the compliance review hearing to September 29, 2014, but the
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)