In re I.C. CA3

Filed 3/11/16 In re I.C. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 I.C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C078353

v. (Super. Ct. No. JV134675)

I.C.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Committed to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Facilities, (DJF) the minor, I.C., appeals, contending he is entitled to additional predisposition credit for time spent in custody on all previously sustained petitions. The minor contends the juvenile court aggregated his period of physical confinement on multiple petitions. In the alternative, if the juvenile court did not aggregate the petitions and only sentenced on one offense, the minor contends the written order of commitment must be amended to delete reference to the previously sustained petitions for it to reflect only the petition on which the court set the maximum period of confinement. Lastly, the parties agree the minor is entitled to five additional days of credit due to a calculation

1

error. We conclude the record does not support the minor’s contention that the juvenile court aggregated the periods of confinement for the multiple petitions. Rather, the juvenile court sentenced the minor to serve the maximum period of confinement on one offense. We also conclude there is no need to amend the court’s written commitment order. Finally, we agree with the parties that the minor is entitled to five additional days of credit. We modify the commitment order accordingly. In all other respects, we affirm the order. FACTS In January 2013, the minor was adjudged a ward of the court for committing vandalism. In May 2013, the minor was continued as a ward for grand theft. In September 2013, he was again continued as a ward for being an accessory after the fact and misdemeanor assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (GBI). In April 2014, the minor admitted that on February 11, 2014, he committed grand theft and assault by means of force likely to produce GBI. At the April hearing, the minor was advised the aggregate maximum term of confinement was six years eight months. Dispositions progressed and included probation, home supervision, juvenile hall, electronic monitoring, work project, and two in-state (Level A) placements: Boy’s Republic and Rite of Passage. On June 24, 2014, while in the second Level A placement (Rite of Passage), the minor violated probation when he battered a group-home staff member and continued to use profanity, racial slurs, and gang expressions despite directives from group home staff to stop. After being terminated from Rite of Passage, the minor was confined in juvenile hall where he was involved in numerous incidents. The probation department recommended the minor be committed to DJF since all available rehabilitation resources had been exhausted and the minor had been rejected by out-of-state (Level B) placement facilities. The probation department also recommended a total confinement time of six years eight months based on all the sustained petitions. The prosecutor disagreed with probation’s recommendation and requested the minor be