Delinquency Case Law

In re Antwon R. (2001) ___ Cal.App.4th___ [104 Cal.Rptr.2d 473]. Court of Appeal, Fourth District.

The juvenile court sustained two Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petitions for a child and committed the child to the California Youth Authority (CYA), without calculating any recommitment custody credit. Petitions were filed against the child for committing first-degree burglary and resisting an officer. The child raised on appeal that the juvenile court had erred in not calculating his precommitment custody credit. The People argued that since the issue had not been raised in the juvenile court, that Penal Code section 1237.1 barred the child from raising solely this issue on appeal. The child contended that section 1237.1 did not apply to juvenile appeals.

The Court of Appeal reversed the commitment order to the extent that the juvenile court had failed to calculate the child's precommitment custody credit, and affirmed the juvenile court's decision in all other respects. The appellate court noted that juvenile proceedings are not to be considered criminal prosecutions. Welfare and Institutions Code section 800 separately authorizes juvenile appeals. Penal Code section 1237.1 indicates that no appeal should be taken by the defendant from a judgment of conviction on the ground that there was a calculation error of presentence custody credits, unless the defendant presents the claim to the trial court or makes a motion to correct the record after sentencing in the trial court. According to the Supreme Court in In re Joseph B. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 952, Penal Code section 1237.5- which prevents an appeal from a defendant from a judgment of conviction after a guilty or nolo contendere plea- does not apply to children. The appellate court reasoned that the Legislature intended sections 1237.1 and 1237.5 to not apply to juveniles. The appellate court also stated that because section 1237.1 permits presentence custody credit, an equivalent amount of time must be subtracted from the maximum period of physical confinement for a child. Also, because Penal Code sections 1235, 1237, 1237.1, and 1237.5 include a party to a felony case (defined as a criminal action in which a felony is charged), the application of these sections to a juvenile proceeding is inappropriate because it is not a "criminal action."

The appellate court determined that the juvenile court had erred by not calculating the child's precommitment custody credit. The case was remanded for the juvenile court to (1) calculate the child's precommitment custody credit, (2) prepare an amended order reflecting the custody credit, and (3) forward a certified copy of the amended commitment order to CYA.