In re C.A. CA3

• Court: California Court of Appeal
• Decided: June 13, 2024
• Docket: C098496
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Filed 6/13/24 In re C.A. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Tehama) ----

In re C.A., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C098496 Law.

THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. No. 21JU000093)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

C.A.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Minor C.A. was adjudged a ward of the court and committed to the County of Tehama Secure Youth Treatment Facility. In 2023, this court remanded the matter for further proceedings because we could not assess whether the juvenile court had properly exercised its discretion in ordering minor’s commitment. (In re C.A. (Aug. 14, 2023, C097069) [nonpub. opn.].) On remand, the juvenile court initially maintained minor in the secure facility, but subsequently terminated the commitment and placed him with his parents. We dismiss the present appeal because the termination of minor’s secure commitment has rendered it moot.

1 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In December 2021, the People filed a juvenile wardship petition against minor alleging rape of a child 14 years or older (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2)), aiding or abetting a rape (§ 264.1, subd. (b)(2)), penetration by a foreign object (§ 289, subd. (a)(1)(C)), possession of a handgun by a minor (§ 29610), and carrying a loaded firearm in public (§ 25850, subd. (a)).1 With respect to the sexual assault charges, the People further alleged that minor used a firearm during the commission of the crimes (§ 12022.5). The juvenile court held a contested adjudication hearing, dismissed the charge of carrying a loaded firearm in public, and otherwise sustained the petition. (In re C.A., supra, C097069.) In September 2022, the juvenile court committed minor to the County of Tehama Secure Youth Treatment Facility. On appeal, this court could not assess, on the record before it, whether the juvenile court had properly exercised its discretion. We therefore reversed the commitment order and remanded the matter for a new disposition hearing. (In re C.A., supra, C097069.) In February and March 2023, the juvenile court held six-month review hearings. The court denied minor’s request to be released to his parents’ custody and ordered him maintained at the secure facility. Minor filed a notice of appeal challenging that decision. His appointed counsel filed a brief asking this court to review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. While minor’s appeal was pending, the juvenile court terminated minor’s secure commitment and placed him with his parents.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 DISCUSSION “ ‘ “[A]n action that originally was based on a justiciable controversy cannot be maintained on appeal if all the questions have become moot by subsequent acts or events. A reversal in such a case would be without practical effect, and the appeal will therefore be dismissed.” ’ ” (People v. DeLong (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 482, 486.) Minor’s present appeal challenges the juvenile court’s decision to maintain his secure placement at the six-month review hearing. The juvenile court has since terminated that placement and placed minor with his parents. Because the relief minor seeks in this appeal has been granted, no further relief is available in this court. Minor’s appeal must therefore be dismissed as moot. (In re N.S. (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 53, 58-59 [“An appellate court will dismiss an appeal where an event occurs that renders it impossible for the court to grant effective relief”].) DISPOSITION The appeal is dismissed as moot.

/s/ Feinberg, J.

We concur:

/s/ Mauro, Acting P. J.

/s/ Duarte, J.