Duncan T. v. Sup. Ct.
Filed 5/3/06 Duncan T. v. Sup. Ct. CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| DUNCAN T., a Minor, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest. | B188189 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MJ13525) |
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS in mandate. Richard Naranjo, Judge. Petition granted.
David M. Wallin for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Steve Cooley, District Attorney, Patrick D. Moran and William Woods, Deputy District Attorneys, for Real Party in Interest.
_________________________
Petitioner Duncan T., a minor, petitions this court for a writ of mandate compelling the juvenile court to quash a warrant for his arrest that it issued after he failed to make a court appearance. Duncan claims the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to issue the arrest warrant because the citation ordering him to appear failed to satisfy certain statutory notice requirements. The People properly concede the warrant for Duncan's arrest must be quashed. We will, therefore, issue a mandamus order in the first instance to that effect.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On September 1, 2005, the minor Duncan T. was allegedly involved in assaulting another minor. A Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy issued citations to appear in juvenile court to Duncan and his mother. The citations contained promises to appear signed by Duncan and his mother, but the citations did not include all of the information required by Welfare and Institutions Code section 660.5.[1]
On November 1, 2005, a section 602 petition was filed, alleging Duncan had committed a battery on school or park property or on hospital grounds in violation of Penal Code section 243.2.
On November 1, 2005, the date set for the hearing, neither Duncan nor his mother appeared in juvenile court. There was an appearance by an attorney who said he had been retained by Duncan's father to represent Duncan. According to the attorney, Duncan's father had taken him to live in Canada because he had been threatened and assaulted several times. The attorney argued there was a jurisdictional flaw in the mother's citation because it failed to specify the date and time of the hearing. The juvenile court rejected this argument and issued a warrant for Duncan's arrest.
Duncan thereafter filed the instant petition for writ of mandate seeking to have the arrest warrant quashed.
DISCUSSION
Section 660.5 sets forth a special statutory scheme â€
