In re J.G.
Filed 11/24/09 In re J.G. CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
In re J. G., a Person Coming Under the
Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, A123691
Plaintiff and Respondent, (AlamedaCounty
Super. Ct. No. SJ06005752)
v.
J. G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
_____________________________________/
J.G. appeals from a disposition committing him to the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). He argues that conditions imposed by the court that were to take effect during his confinement are invalid and must be reversed. We agree and order the appropriate modification.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The precise nature of appellants offenses are not relevant to the issue that has been raised. It should suffice to say that on December 9, 2008, the Alameda County Juvenile Court ordered that appellant be committed to the DJJ for 5 years and 10 months.
II. DISCUSSION
The juvenile court ordered appellant to comply with the following conditions while in the custody of the DJJ:
Hes not to associate with Luis Bernal.
Hes not to belong to any criminal street gang or associate with any persons he knows or should reasonably know are members of a criminal street gang.
Hes not to wear gang clothing, colors, or emblems or acquire tattoos or piercings reasonably known to be associated with or symbolic of criminal street gang membership.
Hes not to possess or use any graffiti-creating materials, including, but not limited to, spray paint, marking pens, and grinding stones or any devices which can be used to break into homes, cars, or other property.
Appellant now challenges these conditions arguing they were unauthorized in light of his commitment to the DJJ.
The People concede the error and we agree.
When a minor is committed to the DJJ, his treatment and rehabilitationincluding physical confinement and paroleare placed under the direct supervision of [the DJJ] rather than the juvenile court. (In re Antoine D. (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 1314, 1324-1325.) [A] commitment to the [DJJ] . . . deprives the juvenile court of any authority to directly supervise the juvenile. (In re Ronny P. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 1204, 1208.) The imposition of conditions that are to take effect while the minor is under the control of the DJJ is, in effect, an impermissible attempt by the juvenile court to be a secondary body governing the minors rehabilitation. (In re Allen N. (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 513, 516.) The appropriate remedy is to strike the conditions. (Ibid.)
III. DISPOSITION
The conditions set forth above are stricken. In all other respects, the disposition is affirmed.
_________________________
Jones, P.J.
We concur:
_________________________
Simons, J.
_________________________
Needham, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line attorney.
