In re J.A. CA6

Filed 9/15/21 In re J.A. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re J.A., a Person Coming Under the H048072 Juvenile Court Law. (Monterey County Super. Ct. No. 20-JV-000093)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.A.,

Defendant and Appellant.

After violating the terms of juvenile probation, appellant was committed to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Seeking a new disposition hearing, he argues there is insufficient evidence demonstrating (1) a probable rehabilitative benefit from the DJJ commitment, and (2) ineffective or inappropriate less restrictive alternatives to the commitment. He also challenges the juvenile court’s denial of his request to waive a $40 restitution fine balance underlying earlier disposition orders. Finding no error, we will affirm. I. BACKGROUND Appellant was declared a ward of the court and placed on juvenile probation in October 2017, after the juvenile court sustained a petition alleging felony battery with great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (d)) and misdemeanor resisting arrest (Pen.

Code, § 148, subd. (a)). The court sustained probation violations in December 2017, March 2018, and May 2018. In May 2018 the court also found true that appellant had committed three misdemeanors—providing false information to a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)), battery (Pen. Code, § 242), and vandalism (Pen. Code, 594, subd. (b)(2)(a))—and appellant was committed to the Monterey County Youth Center for 365 days. Appellant violated probation in November 2018 by failing to complete Youth Center programs and committing misdemeanor battery (Pen. Code, § 242). He violated probation in August 2019 by using drugs and disobeying curfew while in Youth Center aftercare, and in October 2019 for further aftercare violations and by committing three sustained offenses: unlawful driving or taking of a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); a felony), evading an officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a); a felony), and reckless driving (Veh. Code, § 23103, subd. (b); a misdemeanor). Appellant violated probation again in October 2019 by attacking another ward while in custody. A felony assault charge was sustained (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)), and appellant was recommitted to the Youth Center for 365 days. In January 2020, appellant violated his probation by striking another Youth Center ward. The allegation was sustained in March 2020 after a contested hearing. In preparing for further disposition, the juvenile court reviewed the probation officer’s report which recommended a third Youth Center commitment; alternative DJJ commitment findings (requested by the juvenile court in the event it decided to commit appellant to the DJJ); a juvenile hall behavior report; letters submitted by the victim of the 2020 assault, the victim’s father, and on behalf of appellant; and comments from appellant, appellant’s stepfather, and counsel.1 The court committed appellant to a seven- year, nine-month cumulative DJJ term. The court recognized that the probation officer