In re M.C. CA5
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
Appellant M.C. contends the juvenile court abused its discretion when it committed him to the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ),1 because the record lacks substantial evidence a DJJ commitment would necessarily benefit appellant. He further contends the court abused its discretion because it failed to consider changes in law prohibiting commitment to the DJJ on or after July 1, 2021. (§§ 733.1, subd. (a); 736.5, subd. (b).) He also contends the court erroneously set his maximum term of confinement on count 1, and on the enhancements to counts 2 and 3, at the upper term rather than the middle term. Lastly, he contends he is entitled to predisposition custody credits for time spent on electronic monitoring. To the extent any of these claims are forfeited or waived, he claims ineffective assistance of counsel. We will modify the maximum term of confinement on count 1, and on the enhancements to counts 2 and 3, to reflect the middle term. We will remand with directions for the juvenile court to issue a new disposition order reflecting the reduced term. In all other respects, we affirm.