In re Robert H
Filed 3/6/06 In re Robert H. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 ROBERT H., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. |
|
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
ROBERT H.,
Defendant and Appellant.
|
F047984
(Super. Ct. No. 506658)
OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Nancy B. Williamsen, Commissioner.
William J. Capriola, 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, Kathleen A. McKenna and Lloyd G. Carter, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
Appellant was found to have stolen a vehicle. On appeal, he contends (1) the juvenile court did not demonstrate it was aware of its discretion to classify his offense as a misdemeanor, and (2) two of the probation terms were unconstitutionally overbroad. We will modify the challenged probation terms, remand for the juvenile court to exercise its discretion, and affirm in all other respects.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORIES
According to the probation officer's report, the Modesto police observed appellant driving a stolen vehicle on April 24, 2005. The registered owner had never seen appellant and had not given him permission to drive the vehicle.
On April 26, 2005, a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition[1] was filed, alleging that appellant stole a vehicle (§ 10851, subd. (a), a felony; count 1) and received a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d, a felony; count 2). On May 4, 2005, appellant admitted count 1, and count 2 was dismissed. The court declared appellant a ward of the court and determined the maximum permissible confinement time pursuant to section 726 to be 36 months. The court imposed 30 days in juvenile hall, followed by probation with various terms, including prohibitions against associating with certain types of people.
DISCUSSION
I. Nature of the offense
Minor's offense of stealing a vehicle in violation of section 10851, subdivision (a), is a â€
