In re D.L.

Full title: In re D.L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE…

Court: California Court of Appeals, First District, Second Division

Date published: Mar 16, 2009

No. A120680 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2009)

Opinion

In re D.L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D.L., Defendant and Appellant. A120680 California Court of Appeal, First District, Second Division March 16, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Alameda County Super. Ct. No. C176682

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

Kline, P.J.

The opinion filed herein on February 27, 2009, is modified as follows:

(1) On page 5, line 8, the initials “I.K.” are changed to “I.B.” so that the line reads:

“funeral,” a “gathering after the funeral,” a “service at I.B.’s high school, and a

(2) On page 5, line 11, the initials “I.K.” are changed to “I.B.” so that the line reads:

I.B.’s uncle, incurred because the family told the court he had acted as “the liaison for

(3) On page 13, lines 9 through 11 are modified to read as follows:

because grandparents are not within the definition of “victim” used in section 730.6 D.L. also argues that the lost wages claimed by the victim’s uncle are likewise outside the statute’s ambit.

It is true that the adult criminal restitution statute, Penal Code section 1202.4, expressly includes grandparents in “[t]he immediate surviving family within the definition of victim, and section 730.6 does These changes do not effect a change in the judgment.