In Re TC
Opinion
Opinion
In this case arising under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, [1] the parties dispute whether the juvenile court lawfully ordered as a probation condition that appellant, T.C., pay victim restitution on a count of the petition that had been dismissed. Appellant contends the restitution order was invalid because appellant had not entered a waiver pursuant to People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754 [ 159 Cal.Rptr. 696 , 602 P.2d 396 ], allowing the court to consider the circumstances of the dismissed count in ordering restitution. For reasons that follow, we conclude a Harvey waiver was not required. We shall therefore affirm the order for restitution.
On November 22, 2006, the district attorney filed a wardship petition against T.C. in Yolo County.
As pertinent, Count Five alleged that on or about May 16, 2006, in Yolo County, appellant violated section 10851, subdivision (a), of the Vehicle Code in that appellant did willfully and unlawfully drive and take a vehicle, to wit, a Maxima from Fairfield Nissan.
As pertinent, Count Eight alleged that on or about April 17, 2006, to May 9, 2006, in Sacramento and Yolo Counties, appellant violated section 10851,…