In re Ricky G. CA5

Filed 2/28/13 In re Ricky G. CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re RICKY G., a Person Coming Under The Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE, F065352

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. JW123121-01)

v.

RICKY G., OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Peter A. Warmerdam, Juvenile Court Referee. Courtney M. Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Michael A. Canzoneri and Heather S. Gimle, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

Before Levy, A.P.J., Kane, J., Detjen, J.

INTRODUCTION On May 15, 2012, a petition was filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 6021 alleging 16-year-old appellant, Ricky G., committed a felony, attempted carjacking (Pen. Code, §§ 664 & 215). The petition also alleged that appellant’s offense was a serious felony. The prosecutor filed a JV-750 form setting forth a determination that appellant was ineligible for Deferred Entry of Judgment (DEJ). All of the boxes indicating appellant was eligible for DEJ were otherwise checked. The prosecutor did not attach the JV-751 form giving appellant written notification and a full description of the procedures for DEJ as required by section 791, subdivision (a). Appellant contends, and respondent concedes, that attempted carjacking is not an enumerated offense in section 707, subdivision (b) (hereafter section 707(b)) and that he was eligible for DEJ. Because appellant was not properly notified of his eligibility for DEJ, the parties also agree that this case must be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. We agree with the parties. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS Appellant appeared before the juvenile court four times in 2012 prior to the jurisdiction hearing: May 16, May 29, June 14, and June 29.2 On June 29, the juvenile court began taking testimony in the jurisdiction hearing that included appellant’s codefendant, Adan L. Guillermina Villagomez testified that on May 13, she was inside her home watching television when her husband asked her if her car was locked. Guillermina’s husband asked her to move her car from the street to the driveway. As Guillermina was getting her keys, she saw a girl standing near her car. Guillermina entered the car to move it and started the engine. Guillermina looked up and saw the girl