In re Alexandra G.

sFiled 6/21/06 In re Alexandra G. CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

In a joint jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court sustained charges against Alexandra G. (appellant) and Natalia C., both minors, of carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215), unlawful taking of a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), and robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). Appellant was declared a ward of the court and ordered to complete a commitment at the Warren E. Thornton Youth Center, to be followed by probation.

On appeal, appellant contends (1) the evidence is insufficient to support the sustaining of the carjacking or robbery offense, (2) the trial court erred by not staying the term imposed for robbery in calculating the minor's maximum term of confinement, and (3) the court imposed an unconstitutionally vague condition of probation. We reject the minor's first contention, but agree with the second and third.

FACTS

Gabriel Vargas, who speaks very little English, testified that as he was leaving a Wal-Mart at about 10:00 p.m., he was approached by appellant, Natalia C., and a third girl, who repeatedly asked him to give them a ride. He eventually agreed to do so, and Natalia got into the front seat and the other two into the back seat of his Mustang. After stopping at two fast food restaurants and a service station, the girls directed Vargas to a light rail station. During the drive, the girls talked on a cellular telephone, and although Vargas was unable to understand what they were saying, he thought he heard the name â€