D.L.

People v. D.L.

Bad Law
142 Cal. Rptr. 3d 325·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 684·206 Cal. App. 4th 1240·2012 WL 2136487
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 17, 2012No. C067525California1,748 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Butz, J.

The minor, D.L., appeals from the juvenile adjudications finding he committed two burglaries in May 2010. His sole contention on appeal is that the juvenile court erred in failing to hold the required hearing to consider his suitability for deferred entry of judgment (DEJ). We agree and shall reverse and remand.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 30, 2010, a juvenile wardship petition was filed charging 15-year-old D.L. with two counts of residential burglary. (Pen. Code, § 459.) On September 7, 2010, the prosecuting attorney filed a determination of eligibility for DEJ, along with a citation and written notification for DEJ, finding D.L. eligible for DEJ. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 790 et seq.) These notices complied with the statutory requirements of Welfare and Institutions Code sections 790 and 791. The citation stated, “At the hearing the court will consider whether or not to grant a Deferred Entry of Judgment.” The citation did not, however, provide notice of a date when the hearing to consider D.L.’s DEJ suitability would be conducted. The probation department filed a report on September 7, 2010, and noted D.L. was eligible for DEJ. The report went on 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.