In Re Ag

Good Law
113 Cal. Rptr. 3d 593·186 Cal. App. 4th 1454
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 28, 2010D053991California9,007 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDONALD, J.—

The People alleged in an amended petition that A.G., a minor, came within the juvenile court jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code [1] section 602 because she violated Vehicle Code sections 23136, subdivision (a), and 22349, subdivision (a), and the curfew provisions codified in San Diego Municipal Code section 58.0102. The court found true the allegations of the Vehicle Code section 22349, subdivision (a) violation, and the San Diego Municipal Code section 58.0102 violation, and found A.G. was a person described in Welfare and Institutions Code sections 601 and 602. At the dispositional hearing, the court placed A.G. on six months' probation.

A.G. challenges the true finding that she violated either San Diego's curfew ordinance (San Diego Ord. No. 0-18416; hereafter the curfew ordinance) or San Diego Municipal Code section 58.0102, the codification of the curfew ordinance. She asserts both the curfew ordinance and San Diego Municipal Code section 58.0102 contain an implied prerequisite requirement for a true finding that she must have previously received a curfew violation warning citation, and there was no evidence she had previously received a warning…

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.