In re S.G. CA2/6

Filed 11/20/20 In re S.G. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

In re S.G., a Person Coming 2d Crim. No. B302511 Under the Juvenile Court (Super. Ct. No. YJ39732) Law. (Los Angeles County)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

S.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

S.G. appeals from the judgment after the juvenile court sustained a petition for felony vandalism. (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 602; Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a).) The court declared S.G. a ward of the court and placed her on probation. S.G. contends:

Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent statutory 1

references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

(1) we must remand for the trial court to consider deferred entry of judgment (DEJ), and (2) the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted a witness statement as a past recollection recorded. We agree that the case must be remanded to consider DEJ but reject the contention regarding past recollection recorded. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY S.G. was charged with vandalism of a vehicle causing over $400 in damage. The court file contains a Declaration of Eligibility/Deferred Entry of Judgment (Judicial Council form JV- 750), signed by the district attorney’s office, stating that S.G. was eligible for DEJ. (§ 790 et seq.) The file also contains a Citation and Written Notification for Deferred Entry of Judgment (form JV-751), which explains DEJ but does not state a date, time, or location for a DEJ hearing. S.G. denied the charges at arraignment. After the court referred the case to the probation department to consider informal supervision (§ 654.2), the probation department filed a report recommending DEJ. The record does not show that the court considered DEJ before conducting the contested jurisdictional hearing. At trial, C.N. testified that he drove his Mercedes to a house party. He knew S.G. because she previously dated his friend. At the party, C.N. saw S.G. look at him as she whispered into her sister’s ear. S.G.’s sister then told C.N. that something happened to his car. He saw two key marks on the passenger door. Police Officer Joseph Roberts testified that he responded to the party. Roberts talked to a witness, J.K., and recorded the conversation with a body camera. J.K. told Roberts that he heard S.G. say she was going to “key” the car. He said he followed her outside and saw her “key” the front passenger side of