legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Ashley L.

In re Ashley L.
06:20:2007

In re Ashley L.





Filed 9/6/06 In re Ashley L. CA2/7






NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 SEVEN














In re ASHLEY L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.



B184210


(Los Angeles County


Super. Ct. No. NJ19937)



THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


ASHLEY L.,


Defendant and Appellant.




APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,


John H. Ing, Judge. Affirmed as modified.


Patricia Winters, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.


Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Jaime L. Fuster and Victoria B. Wilson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


___________________________


Ashley L. was declared a ward of the juvenile court and placed home on probation after the court sustained a petition alleging she had unlawfully driven or taken a vehicle.[1] She contends two of her probation conditions are unconstitutional and the court failed to exercise its discretion when setting her maximum period of confinement. We affirm the order as modified.


FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND


Among the conditions of probation, Ashley L. was ordered to â€





Description Appellant was declared a ward of the juvenile court and placed home on probation after the court sustained a petition alleging appellant had unlawfully driven or taken a vehicle. Appellant contends two of her probation conditions are unconstitutional and the court failed to exercise its discretion when setting her maximum period of confinement. Court affirm the order as modified.

Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale