In re M.V.

People v. M.V.

Good Law
171 Cal. Rptr. 3d 519·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 403·225 Cal. App. 4th 1495·2014 WL 1761347
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2014A137348California14,163 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

M.V., a minor, appeals from an order of the juvenile court dismissing dependency jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, declaring her to be a ward of the court pursuant to section 602, and placing her in out-of-home care. Specifically, M.V. identifies numerous bases for error in the juvenile court’s decision under section 241.1 to make her a ward of the court rather than continuing her as a juvenile court dependent. M.V. also advances several reasons why the negotiated plea agreement on which her declaration of wardship was based should be set aside. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

On October 22, 2012, the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office (District Attorney) filed a wardship petition pursuant to section 602 alleging that M.V. (then 15 years old) had loitered in a public place with the intent to commit prostitution (Pen. Code, § 653.22) and had agreed to engage in an act of prostitution (Pen. Code, § 647, subd. (b)). The police report filed in connection with this matter described the incident upon which these allegations were based as follows; On October 19, 2012, two police officers spoke with an individual in the parking lot of the Islander…

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.