Opinion
B200584
4-25-2008
In re PABLO G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PABLO G., Defendant and Appellant
Courtney M. Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Pablo G. appeals from a sustained petition finding that he came under the provisions of Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. The court found that Pablo committed grand theft in violation of Penal Code section 487, subdivision (a). Pablo contends the court failed to declare whether the offense was a felony or a misdemeanor as required by section 702. We disagree. He also contends, and we agree, that the court erred by declaring a maximum period of confinement. We modify the disposition to delete the maximum period of confinement. In all other respects, we affirm.
All undesignated code section references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
BACKGROUND
On December 14, 2006, Pablo was in his math class using a school-owned laptop computer assigned to him just for that class period. After class, the teacher noticed that the laptop Pablo had been using was missing and reported the loss to the dean of the school. The dean investigated the matter, questioned various students, and recovered the power cord of the missing computer from a friend of Pablos. On December 15, 2006, the dean, and then police, questioned Pablo, who ultimately confessed to taking the laptop and was arrested.
Pablo later indicated that he confessed because a fellow student threatened him if he did not, and he also moved, unsuccessfully, to suppress his initial confession to the dean based upon a lack of Miranda warnings. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.) The court, however, found that Pablos confession was voluntary, and Pablo does not challenge that ruling on appeal.
On February 14, 2007, the Los Angeles County District Attorney filed a section 602 petition alleging that Pablo, 14 years old, had committed grand theft in violation of Penal Code section 487, subdivision (a). On June 11, 2007, at the adjudication hearing, the court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the allegations of the petition were true and declared Pablo a ward of the court. The court placed Pablo on probation in his parents home and imposed various probation conditions. The court also declared a maximum confinement period of three years and stated, "This matter is a felony." Pablo timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
I. Section 702
Pablo contends the court erred by failing to declare whether the theft of the laptop was a felony o.r a misdemeanor as required by section 702. The record, however, does not support Pablos contention. The hearing transcript shows that the court did comply with section 702 by stating, "This matter is a felony." No more was required. (See In re Manzy W. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1199, 1203-1204.)
II. Maximum Confinement Period
Pablo maintains that when a juvenile delinquent is placed in his home on probation, the court may not declare a maximum confinement period because no period of confinement was imposed (see In re Ali A. (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 569, 573-574), and that accordingly, the court erred when it declared a maximum confinement period of three years. We agree.
Although the Attorney General points out that the maximum term of confinement need not be stricken because it has no legal effect (see In re Ali A., supra, 139 Cal.App.4th at pp. 573-574), we see no reason not to correct the error to ensure that it has no inadvertent future consequences.
DISPOSITION
The disposition order dated June 11, 2007, is modified by deleting the declaration that the maximum period of confinement is three years. As modified, the order is affirmed. The trial court is directed to prepare a corrected abstract of the disposition and forward a certified copy of the minute order to the Los Angeles County Probation Department.
We Concur:
VOGEL, Acting P. J.
JACKSON, J.