Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. JV32679
Premo, J.
The juvenile court found E.A. (minor) to be a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 (wardship for violation of law) in that he had driven under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of.08 percent or greater and caused injury, committed hit and run resulting in injury, and committed misdemeanor hit and run. It placed minor on probation and in the Juvenile Drug Treatment Court (JTC) program after signing an agreement with minor that outlined the conditions of minor's participation in the program, which included a condition that probation would be terminated upon graduation from the program. It later ordered that minor pay victim restitution in unspecified amounts. After finding that minor had successfully completed the program, it refused to terminate probation because minor had not made full victim restitution. Minor thereafter paid some restitution and made a motion to dismiss probation. The juvenile court denied the motion. On appeal, minor contends that he is entitled to have his probation dismissed pursuant to the JTC agreement. We agree. We therefore reverse the order and direct dismissal of minor's probation.
Further unspecified statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
BACKGROUND
Minor drank beer, went to a dance, then home where a friend was waiting. He went with his friend to a party in the friend's car, drank more beer and consumed cocaine at the party. He left the party driving his friend's car. He drove through a red light, crashed into a car causing it to crash into two other vehicles, and left the scene. He injured Wanda Skidmore and totaled her car. He damaged Terry Zaffonato's car. He caused minor damage to Peter Wyatt's car.
On March 6, 2007, the People filed a section 602 petition. On March 7, minor admitted three allegations and the juvenile court referred minor for JTC screening. On March 23, the juvenile court and minor signed a JTC “DISPOSITION AGREEMENT.” The agreement provides, in relevant part: “I further understand that, in the event that I am successful in completing all of the requirements under the program, the disposition which has been imposed but suspended, including custodial time, fines and fees, will never be imposed and my probation will be terminated.” It also generally provides that minor will abide by the terms of probation to which he is subject and, upon a failure to abide, will be subject to possible sanctions including modification of probation. On July 12, the juvenile court declared minor a ward of the court, placed him on probation with conditions that included victim restitution in unspecified amounts to be determined, and granted him admission into JTC. The probation report indicated that Skidmore was requesting restitution of approximately $10,453 and Zaffonato was requesting restitution of $500.
Minor completed the JTC program. At a hearing on August 14, 2008, the juvenile court found that minor had successfully completed the JTC program. But it ordered the following: “There is restitution outstanding, so prob. not dismissed today.” It continued the hearing to February 18, 2009, for a restitution review hearing. A probation report indicated that no payments had been made to Skidmore or Zaffonato.
Between August 14, 2008, and February 18, 2009, the juvenile court sustained a section 777 petition (violation of probation) after minor admitted consuming alcohol and drugs. It continued minor on probation with conditions.
On February 18, 2009, the juvenile court continued the hearing to August 19. A probation report indicated that minor had reduced the $10,953 balance to $9,403.
Minor filed his motion to dismiss probation on July 30, 2009. On August 19, the juvenile court continued the restitution review hearing to August 26 so as to hear it in conjunction with minor's motion. Minor's written motion argued that “The court should dismiss probation today... because the JTC contract makes absolutely no mention of restitution having to be paid prior to the minor receiving a dismissal of probation upon successful completion of the JTC program.” At the hearing, minor noted that he had been residing in a recovery home for five months and the parties acknowledged that minor's parents had been paying $200 per month in restitution, reducing the balance to $7,603. The People argued that “[I]f probation is dismissed at this early juncture with the payment of such a large amount, I can't be certain that payments will continue. Although they have been being made, I think one of the motivating factors is that the subject is still on probation.” The juvenile court remarked: “Let me say a lot of the same things I've already said. The motion is going to be denied, and I think you were expecting that. You know, I'm sorry that [minor] is doing so well. I wish I was in a position to dismiss probation and reward him. But I don't feel that I am. I have two victims who were victims because of a D-U-I sustained by [minor] with injury. So these are not victims that were in any way culpable for the crime, and... one of them in particular accumulated injuries at a cost of $10,453.” It later concluded: “It appears that [minor] is doing very well. He's in a rehab home and doing well and looking good, and that the victim is getting paid, which seems to fulfill at this point both of the conditions required by the law and required by the court, and there is no reason for the court to change that status quo by dismissing probation and upset the equilibrium that has now been established. And with that, I will deny the request and set another restitution hearing, which could be six months or a year.”
DISCUSSION
Minor first argues that the juvenile court violated his plea bargain by refusing to dismiss his probation after he had fulfilled his end of the bargain by successfully completing and graduating from the JTC program. He next argues that the juvenile court breached the terms of the JTC disposition agreement by refusing to dismiss his probation upon graduation from the program. He asks for specific performance of the bargain or contract.
The record contains no evidence that minor negotiated a plea bargain for a JTC disposition with the prosecutor. The record instead shows that the minor admitted three allegations of the section 602 petition in anticipation of being accepted and placed into the JTC program without a promise, from either the prosecutor or the court, that he would be placed in the JTC program.
As to minor's contract theory, a juvenile court disposition is not usually construed via civil contract principles. We nevertheless agree that minor is entitled to the relief he seeks.
Although this is not akin to a plea bargain case, the juvenile court represented, without qualification, that it would terminate probation upon minor's graduation from the JTC program. Nothing was said at the time about other procedural loose ends. The juvenile court clearly and expressly stated that probation would terminate. We therefore reject the People's theory that the JTC disposition agreement is nothing but a unilateral acknowledgement by minor of the obligatory requirements for JTC participation. And we also reject the People's argument that the JTC disposition agreement should be interpreted as a whole to give effect to its general provision requiring minor to abide by the conditions of probation, conditions which necessarily include the condition to pay victim restitution. Under contract law, “If a general and a specific provision are inconsistent, the specific provision controls.” (Ticor Title Ins. Co. v. Rancho Santa Fe Assn. (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 726, 730.) Again, the juvenile court specifically stated that minor's disposition “will never be imposed and [his] probation will be terminated” upon graduation from JTC.
In summary, the juvenile court represented to minor that it would terminate probation upon JTC graduation. Since minor graduated, there is no justification for the juvenile court's refusal to terminate minor's probation.
DISPOSITION
The order denying minor's motion to dismiss probation is reversed. The juvenile court is directed to dismiss minor's probation.
WE CONCUR: Rushing, P.J., Elia, J.