In re J.A. CA3
Filed 3/21/24 In re J.A. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Glenn) ----
In re J.A., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C098606 Law.
THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. No. 23JQ00768)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
J.A.,
Defendant and Appellant.
The minor J.A. appeals a judgment entered after his admission to battery with great bodily injury and the juvenile court’s determination he had discharged a firearm at an occupied motor vehicle and assaulted six victims with a firearm. The court found he
1
was a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602)1 and imposed a fine in the amount of $1,000. His sole contention on appeal is that remand for further proceedings is required because: (1) it is unclear under what authority the juvenile court imposed the $1,000 fine; and (2) assuming the fine was imposed under section 730.6, subdivision (b), there is no express indication the trial court considered his ability to pay. We will affirm. I. BACKGROUND The juvenile wardship petition alleged the minor committed discharge of a firearm at an occupied motor vehicle (Pen. Code, § 246—count I); assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)—counts II-VII); and battery causing serious bodily injury (Pen. Code, §§ 242, 243, subd. (d)—count VIII). The petition also alleged the minor inflicted great bodily injury during the commission of count VIII. On March 2, 2023, the minor admitted the truth of count VIII, and in exchange, the court dismissed the enhancement allegation. The remaining counts were set for a contested jurisdictional hearing. At the April 11, 2023, contested jurisdictional hearing, the People presented evidence that the minor, who was a passenger in a car, repeatedly shot a black revolver at another car occupied by six people. The juvenile court found true the allegations that the minor had committed counts I through VII, and the matter was set for a dispositional hearing. At the May 18, 2023, dispositional hearing, the juvenile court declared all counts to be felonies, declared the minor a ward of the court, and committed him for treatment at the Maxine Singer Youth Guidance Center for a period not to exceed one year. The court also determined the minor’s maximum term, awarded custody credits, and found that reasonable efforts had been made to prevent his removal from his home. Finally, the
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)