In re J.H. CA3

Filed 1/29/21 In re J.H. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yolo) ----

In re J.H., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C091241 Law.

THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. Nos. JDSQ17426, JDSQ17566, JDSQ18112, Plaintiff and Respondent, JDSQ18257)

v.

J.H.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Following his adjudication on multiple juvenile wardship petitions, the minor, J.H., was adjudged a ward of the Yolo County Juvenile Court and committed to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Following his direct appeal, this court modified the judgment to accurately reflect the minor’s predisposition credits but otherwise affirmed the judgment. The minor subsequently filed a motion to recall the DJJ commitment in the juvenile court, which the

1

court denied. On appeal, the minor contends the juvenile court erred in denying his motion to recall the DJJ commitment order. We disagree and shall affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The minor’s underlying four juvenile court cases, which resulted in his DJJ commitment, were the subject of an appeal in case No. C088098.1 In the unpublished decision of January 10, 2020, we modified the predisposition custody credits but otherwise affirmed the judgment. (In re J.H. (Jan. 10, 2020, C088098) (J.H. I).) While that appeal was pending, on August 30, 2019, the minor filed a motion to recall the DJJ commitment with the juvenile court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 779.2 In the motion, the minor argued that the commitment order must be set aside because he was not being provided with reformatory treatment and the commitment was not of probable benefit to him. At the hearing on the minor’s motion to recall his DJJ commitment, Anna Natividad-Pham, a supervising casework specialist of the intake units at DJJ, testified that she oversees the youthful offenders committed to DJJ and supervises three casework specialists who prepare clinical summaries and case plans. During the intake process, staff evaluate the minor who has been committed to DJJ and develop an initial case plan. During this process, medical, mental health, and educational professionals perform testing on the minor, and a casework specialist will use the information from the assessment team to develop the case plan. DJJ also utilizes the California Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (YASI), which is an evidence-based tool that helps determine the youth’s treatment needs, risk of re-offense, and strengths to determine which programs would be beneficial to the minor. The YASI can be administered