In re A.S.
Filed 6/8/06 In re A.S. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| In re A. S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A. S., Defendant and Appellant. |
F048841
(Super. Ct. No. JJD057943)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. William Silveira, Judge.
James Fallman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Brian Alvarez and William K. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
The court adjudged appellant, A. S., a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code,
§ 602) after it found that A. S. committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)[1] as charged in count 1 of a petition and attempted second degree robbery (§§ 664/211), a lesser included offense of the robbery offense charged in count 3 of the petition. The court also found true allegations that the attempted robbery was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)). On appeal, A. S. contends the court erred in calculating his maximum term of confinement. We will affirm.
FACTS
On June 30, 2005, at approximately 10:27 p.m., while A. S. and two other juveniles waited outside, Chava S. entered the Valley Food and Gas Market in Visalia and ran out with a 20-pack of beer. As a security guard attempted to take the beer away from Chava, the store clerk came out and struck Chava on the arm with a bat, causing him to drop a small caliber handgun he retrieved from his pocket. Chava picked up the gun and aimed it at the security guard before he and the other juveniles rode off on bicycles.
Later that night, at approximately 11:06 p.m., A. S. and three other juveniles were riding their bicycles when they stopped a man riding a bicycle. One of the juveniles pulled out a gun, demanded to know if the man had any money, and told him to hand over his wallet. However, after two bystanders told the group to leave the man alone, the group left. When A. S. and another juvenile were arrested later that night, A. S. admitted being a gang member.
On August 25, 2005, the court set A. S.'s maximum term of confinement at nine years two months as follows: A three-year term for the attempted second degree robbery conviction in count 3, a five-year gang enhancement in that count, a one-year term for the second degree robbery offense in count 1, and a one-month term for each of two unrelated disturbing the peace offenses that were aggregated from a prior petition. The court also placed A. S. in the custody of the probation department for placement in a group home.
DISCUSSION
A. S. contends the court erred in calculating his maximum term of confinement because its statement finding the arming enhancement in count 3 not true is ambiguous and it improperly used a three-year term as the upper term for the robbery offense in count 1 in calculating this term. A. S. is wrong.
Welfare and Institutions Code section 726, subdivision (c), in pertinent part provides:
â€
