In re Oscar M.
Filed 4/26/06 In re Oscar M. CA1/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 ONE
In re OSCAR M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. OSCAR M., Defendant and Appellant. | A112079 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. SJ05000712-01) |
In this appeal in a juvenile criminal proceedings, the minor, Oscar M., challenges only an order requiring him to pay the victim restitution in the sum of $2,800. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On March 3, 2005, the Alameda County District Attorney filed a petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 charging Oscar M., age 14, with three felony counts and a misdemeanor count. Counts 1 and 2 alleged that the minor committed the felony of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) by assaulting Armando B. and Mario C., respectively, with a metal bar by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury, and alleged pursuant to Penal Code section 12022.7 the infliction of great bodily injury on Armando B. Counts 3 and 4 alleged unrelated offenses: unauthorized use of a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851) and driving a vehicle without a license. (Veh. Code, § 12500, subd. (a).) The first two counts arose from an assault on two middle school students in San Lorenzo as they were walking home from school. Oscar M. and a companion accosted the students and inquired of their gang affiliation and then seriously injured Armando B. by striking him on the back of the head with a metal bar. Mario C. was struck on the shoulder and side but escaped further injury.
Oscar M. admitted the first count and the district attorney dismissed the other counts and the allegation of great bodily injury. At a dispositional hearing, the court adjudged Oscar M. a ward of the court, ordered that he be placed in a suitable foster home, and set a date for a hearing on the victim's restitution claim. A contested restitution hearing was held on November 2, 2005. After hearing the testimony of Gabriella C., the mother of Mario C., the court ordered the minor to pay restitution in the sum of $2,800 to the victim through the probation department. Oscar M. filed a notice of appeal from the restitution order.
The record discloses that, at the hearing on November 2, 2005, Gabriela C. testified that before the assault she drove Mario to middle school every morning where he attended eighth grade. He walked home after school was out. After the incident, she considered that it was no longer safe for her son to walk home and arranged to have her father pick him at the school. She acknowledged that Oscar M. did not attend the school and was placed in a group home in another county, but she explained, â€