In re J.W.
Defendant and appellant J.W. appeals from a disposition order made after the juvenile court found true allegations of a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition alleging defendant committed forcible rape in concert (Pen. Code, §§ 261, 264.1)[1] and forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)). The court placed defendant on supervised home probation, with 10 weekends in juvenile hall, stayed, pending his successful completion of a juvenile sex offender treatment program. Defendant contends he was entitled to a jury trial at the jurisdictional hearing because he potentially faces commitment to the Department of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) and upon discharge or parole therefrom would be subject to registration requirements under section 290.008[2] and residency restrictions under section 3003.5.[3] Defendant acknowledges existing precedent holds there is no constitutional right to jury trial in juvenile proceedings, but contends this authority did not consider lifetime registration requirements and residency restrictions, and the seemingly blanket rule that there is no jury trial right in juvenile proceedings should be revisited under equal protection and due process theories. He further points out the California Supreme Court has granted review on the issue he raises in In re S.W., review granted January 26, 2011, S187897.[4] The Attorney General contends the issue raised is not ripe for review since defendant was not committed to and is not facing parole from DJF, and this court is, in any event, is bound by existing precedent. Even assuming the issue defendant raises is properly before us, we agree existing precedent controls and affirm the disposition order.
Comments on In re J.W.