In re Darnell C.

Filed 10/26/06 In re Darnell C. CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

I.

INTRODUCTION

Appellant Darnell C. (appellant) appeals from the disposition of a juvenile delinquency petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) alleging that he possessed cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350). He contends there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court's finding that he possessed cocaine, because the drugs were discovered in a room he shared with his cousin. Therefore, appellant argues that respondent did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he possessed the drug, including the requirement that he knew of its presence in the room.

Additionally, appellant argues that the court erred in calculating his precommitment custody credits, granting him credit for 122 days rather than the 127 days to which he was entitled. He also contends that the court failed to give him credit for time served under his previously sustained petitions, and that the case should be remanded for determination of such credits. Respondent concedes both points relating to the determination of custody credits.

We affirm the court's finding but remand with instructions to increase appellant's precommitment custody credits to 127 days, and to calculate the appropriate credits to be awarded for time served under previous petitions.

II.

BACKGROUND

On August 30, 2005, Oakland Police Department officers attempted to stop and speak with appellant and a male companion about an armed robbery that took place on August 18. Appellant and his companion ran from the police. With an officer in pursuit, the young men threw firearms over a fence into a residential yard. Appellant was observed throwing a black and brown weapon. Moments later, police caught and arrested appellant on suspicion of armed robbery and being a minor in possession of a firearm. Police recovered a black and brown .22-caliber pistol from the yard into which appellant had thrown his weapon.

The following day, having learned that appellant was on probation with a full search clause, officers conducted a probation search of a bedroom in appellant's mother's home, which she pointed out to officers as being his room. In that room, hidden inside a speaker box, officers found a cigarette pack containing twenty-five .22-caliber bullets. They also found a shoe box under the bed containing a piece of rock cocaine and seven .22-caliber bullets, and a piece of rock cocaine hidden near the headboard of the bed. Also recovered were a black hooded sweatshirt matching the description of the sweatshirt worn by an individual during the August 18 armed robbery, a batting glove of the sort frequently used by robbers to prevent leaving fingerprints on firearms, and papers on a desk related to appellant's probation. On the basis of this search, appellant was charged with possession of cocaine base in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350.

At the December 14, 2005 contested jurisdictional hearing, appellant's counsel presented the testimony of appellant's mother, who stated that the room where the cocaine was found was also being used by appellant's cousin. Appellant's mother testified that appellant and his cousin had been sharing the room for three months, that both occupants used all the space in the room, and that she had never previously had seen any cocaine or bullets in the room. She testified that â€