In re Geovani H. CA4/1
Filed 6/20/23 In re Geovani H. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In re GEOVANI H., a Person Coming D081100 Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. J244069)
v.
GEOVANI H.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Richard R. Monroy, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with directions. Deanna L. Lopas, by appointment of the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorneys General, Arlene A. Sevidal and Eric Tran, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Geovani H. was charged with four criminal offenses in two juvenile wardship petitions filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section
602. He admitted to two separate charges of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injuries (GBI); the remaining charges were dismissed. At a settlement conference, the juvenile court stated that his maximum aggregate term of confinement was nine years. At the disposition hearing, the court gave him credit for 61 days of predisposition custody credits. On appeal, Geovani contends—and the Attorney General concedes— the juvenile court erred in its statement of his maximum aggregate term of confinement and also erred, subsequently, in miscalculating his custody credits. We agree and remand for the court to reassess the maximum aggregate period of confinement and the actual custody credits. In all other respects, the order is affirmed. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On November 5, 2021, Geovani and his friends attacked the victim in a Wendy’s restaurant as part of an altercation arising from “gang bad blood.” Neither Geovani nor the victim were gang members. On November 18, Geovani was taken into custody. Later that month, the San Diego County District Attorney filed a wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a)) charging Geovani with
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)