People v. Stephon L.

181 Cal. App. 4th 1227, 104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 907
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedFebruary 8, 2010
DocketB215402
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 181 Cal. App. 4th 1227 (People v. Stephon L.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Stephon L., 181 Cal. App. 4th 1227, 104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 907 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

*1229 Opinion

MOSK, J.—

INTRODUCTION

Minor and appellant Stephon L. (minor) appeals from a juvenile court order finding him in violation of probation in connection with a sustained petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 (section 602). Minor is the subject of two sustained section 602 petitions. Minor contends that the juvenile court erred in failing to award him predisposition credit. We conclude that the appeal is not moot regardless of the expiration of the minor’s camp commitment because his maximum period of physical confinement has not expired. Because minor’s maximum period of physical confinement for the two section 602 petitions was aggregated, we hold that minor is entitled to credit for all actual time spent in custody in connection with either petition.

BACKGROUND 1

Minor was arrested on November 4, 2006. On November 7, 2006, the district attorney’s office filed a section 602 petition alleging that minor committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and personally used a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12022.53, subd. (b)). On June 6, 2007, the petition was amended to add a count of being a minor in possession of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person. (Pen. Code, § 12101, subd. (a)(1).) Minor pleaded no contest to the concealed weapon possession offense, and the juvenile court sustained the petition as to that offense. The juvenile court dismissed and struck the robbery offense and personal use of a firearm enhancement, respectively. The juvenile court found the concealed weapon possession offense to be a felony, set the maximum period of physical confinement at three years (Pen. Code, §§18, 12101, subd. (c)(1)(C); Welf. & Inst. Code, § 726, subd. (c)), and ordered minor placed in camp for a midterm placement of six months with 214 days of credit. Minor remained in custody from his arrest on November 4, 2006, until his release on December 21, 2007, a period of 413 days.

On April 24, 2008, minor was arrested again. On April 28, 2008, the district attorney’s office filed a section 602 petition alleging that minor *1230 committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), possessed a weapon on school grounds (Pen. Code, § 626.10, subd. (a)), and committed second degree commercial burglary (Pen. Code, § 459). On August 7, 2008, the petition was amended to add a count of grand theft from a person, a felony. (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (c).) Pursuant to a plea agreement, minor admitted that he committed grand theft from a person. The juvenile court sustained the petition as to that offense and dismissed the remaining counts.

The juvenile court ordered minor placed in a long-term camp commitment for a period of nine months under various terms and conditions, set the maximum period of physical confinement at three years eight months, and awarded minor 105 days of credit, without aggregating the custody credits in connection with both sustained petitions. Although not expressly stated in the record, the three-year-eight-month maximum period of physical confinement could only have been an aggregated maximum period computed as follows: three years for the offense sustained in connection with the November 7, 2006, section 602 petition (Pen. Code, §§ 18, 12101, subds. (a)(1) & (c)(1)(C); Welf. & Inst. Code, § 726, subd. (c)), and eight months (one-third of the middle term of two years) for the offense sustained in connection with the April 28, 2008, section 602 petition (Pen. Code, §§ 18, 487, subd. (c), 489; Welf. & Inst. Code, § 726, subd. (c)). (See In re Eric J. (1979) 25 Cal.3d 522, 536-537 [159 Cal.Rptr. 317, 601 P.2d 549].)

On January 21, 2009, minor’s probation officer filed a section 777 notice of violation of probation. 2 On March 18, 2009, the juvenile court found minor in violation of his probation. The juvenile court terminated minor’s long-term camp commitment and ordered him placed in a midterm camp commitment for a period of six months. The juvenile court did not address minor’s custody credit.

On May 8, 2009, minor’s probation officer filed a second section 777 notice of violation of probation. On June 23, 2009, the juvenile court found minor in violation of his probation. The juvenile court terminated minor’s midterm camp commitment and placed him on a new six-month midterm camp commitment. An October 30, 2009, minute order indicates a release date for minor of December 30, 2009.

We requested supplemental letter briefs from the parties on the issues of whether minor’s appeal is moot and whether minor is entitled to custody credit earned in connection with a prior sustained section 602 petition.

*1231 DISCUSSION

A. Mootness

“A case becomes moot when a court ruling can have no practical impact or cannot provide the parties with effective relief.” (Simi Corp. v. Garamendi (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1496, 1503 [1 Cal.Rptr.3d 207]; see Ebensteiner Co., Inc. v. Chadmar Group (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1178 [49 Cal.Rptr.3d 825] [“Generally, courts decide only ‘actual controversies’ which will result in a judgment that offers relief to the parties. [Citations.]”].) “Thus, appellate courts as a rule will not render opinions on moot questions . . . .” (Ebensteiner Co., Inc. v. Chadmar Group, supra, 143 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1178-1179.)

The credit issue minor raises on appeal is not moot. On August 7, 2008, the juvenile court ordered minor placed in a long-term camp commitment for a period of nine months and stated that his maximum period of physical confinement is three years eight months. It appears that that maximum period expires on February 6, 2012. On March 18, 2009, the juvenile court terminated minor’s nine-month, long-term camp commitment and ordered him placed in a midterm camp commitment for a period of six months. Minor appeals from the juvenile court’s failure to award him credit in connection with that camp commitment, which, by its terms, was set to expire on September 18, 2009. Because his appeal would not be resolved by September 18, 2009, it appears that there would be no immediate relief available to minor if we were to decide his case in his favor. Events subsequent to the March 18, 2009, hearing demonstrate why minor’s appeal is not moot.

On May 8, 2009, minor’s probation officer filed a new section 777 petition. On June 23, 2009, the juvenile court found minor in violation of his probation and placed him on a new six-month midterm camp commitment. Minor was to be released from that placement on December 30, 2009. As minor’s conduct demonstrates, minor may be returned to custody for future probation violations, and that custody will be credited against his maximum period of physical confinement. Thus, the relevant inquiry in determining mootness with respect to minor’s credit claim is the expiration of minor’s maximum period of physical confinement and not the expiration of any camp commitment that does not exhaust minor’s maximum period of physical confinement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re H.T.
California Court of Appeal, 2025
In re H.T. CA3
California Court of Appeal, 2025
In re E.H. CA5
California Court of Appeal, 2025
In re J.I. CA3
California Court of Appeal, 2024
In re Kakowski CA4/1
California Court of Appeal, 2024
In re R.A. CA1/1
California Court of Appeal, 2023
In re Geovani H. CA4/1
California Court of Appeal, 2023
In re Bailey
California Court of Appeal, 2022
People v. Bonilla CA4/2
California Court of Appeal, 2022
In re Bisel CA5
California Court of Appeal, 2021
In re Guyton CA5
California Court of Appeal, 2021
In re J.C. CA4/2
California Court of Appeal, 2021
In re Elijah D. CA1/1
California Court of Appeal, 2021
People v. Remson CA2/3
California Court of Appeal, 2021
In re D.H. CA2/7
California Court of Appeal, 2020
In re Trevor M. CA1/1
California Court of Appeal, 2020
People v. Leelu
California Court of Appeal, 2019
In re Arroyo
California Court of Appeal, 2019
In re Arroyo
250 Cal. Rptr. 3d 520 (California Court of Appeals, 5th District, 2019)
In re A.R.
California Court of Appeal, 2018

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181 Cal. App. 4th 1227, 104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stephon-l-calctapp-2010.