In Re Trevor W.

People v. Trevor W.

Good Law
106 Cal. Rptr. 2d 169·88 Cal. App. 4th 833
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 27, 2001E027461California1,996 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richli, J.

Trevor W. appeals from a juvenile court disposition sustaining allegations of grand theft and placing him on probation on condition he serve 210 days in juvenile hall and make restitution to the victim. We conclude the court lacked authority to impose the juvenile hall time without adjudging Trevor to be a ward of the court. Otherwise, we affirm the disposition.

I

Factual and Procedural Background

Trevor became employed as a sales associate at an Izod clothing store in November 1998. The store sustained substantial losses between December 1998 and May 1999. Although figures for that specific period were not kept, the losses for the period from July 1998 to July 1999 totaled more than $26,000. This represented “shrinkage” in inventory of 5.7 to 6.8 percent. Normal shrinkage for an Izod store would be 2 to 3 percent.

On May 28, 1999, Trevor was questioned by two Izod managers, and later by a police officer, about the losses at the store. In these interviews, and later in court, Trevor admitted he had let five individuals take merchandise without paying. He said this had occurred eight times in December 1998. He also said about 140 items had been taken from January to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.