legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Jonathan T.

In re Jonathan T.
05:29:2006

Filed 5/18/06 In re Jonathan T. CA2/3




NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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


SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT


DIVISION THREE







In re JONATHAN T., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.


____________________________________


THE PEOPLE


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


JONATHAN T.,


Defendant and Appellant.


B184942


(Los Angeles County


Super. Ct. No. TJ15007)


APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles Q. Clay, III, Judge. Affirmed.


Ronnie Duberstein, 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, Victoria B. Wilson and Herbert S. Tetef, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


_________________________


Jonathan T., a minor, appeals from the order of wardship (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) entered following a determination that he committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). The court ordered appellant placed in camp for a maximum term of physical confinement of five years.


In this case, we accept respondent's concession that the dispositional minute order's recitation of the terms of two probation conditions should be conformed to the trial court's oral pronouncement of a knowledge requirement as to each condition.


CONTENTION


Appellant contends the clerk's minute order must be conformed to the trial court's oral pronouncement.


DISCUSSION


1. The Dispositional Minute Order Must Be Conformed to the Trial Court's Oral Pronouncement as to Probation Condition Numbers 16 and 21.


a. Pertinent Facts.[1]


At the June 28, 2005 dispositional hearing on the petition for the present offense, the court, enumerating and imposing appellant's probation conditions, orally stated, â€





Description A decision regarding order of wardship entered following a determination that he committed second degree robbery .
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