IN RE: CHRISTIAN H. (2011)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Following a court trial, the juvenile court sustained a petition against Christian H. under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, for one count of residential burglary and one count of grand theft of personal property.   The court placed defendant in community camp placement, with a maximum term of confinement of seven years, four months.   On appeal, appellant challenges only the maximum term of confinement, contending the term for grand theft should have been stayed.   The respondent concedes this error;  we agree and remand to correct the disposition.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

In light of the limited nature of the appeal, we summarize the facts briefly.   Appellant was detained on June 15, 2010, after a neighbor observed three young Black men entering a home;  appellant was discovered by the police shortly thereafter in a nearby abandoned shed with property identified as having come from the home.   After a court trial, the court sustained the petition, which alleged violations of Penal Code sections 459 (residential burglary) and 487(a) (grand theft of personal property).   The court declared the offenses to be felonies, and set a maximum term of confinement of seven years, four months.

DISCUSSION

Welfare and Institutions Code section 726 requires the court, in the case of a minor who has been removed from the physical custody of his family as a result of a sustained petition under section 602, to specify a maximum term of confinement based on the maximum term that could be imposed on an adult for the same offenses.  (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 726, subd. (c);  In re Matthew A. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 537, 541.)  Penal Code section 654 prohibits multiple punishment where multiple statutes are violated as a result of the “same act or omission” with the intent of facilitating a single objective.   (People v. Harrison (1989) 48 Cal.3d 321, 335.)   Where a burglary is committed with the intent to commit a felony, here the grand theft, section 654 ordinarily does not permit punishment for both.  (People v. Hester (2000) 22 Cal.4th 290, 294;  People v. Centers (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 84, 98;  In re Jose P. (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 458, 469.)

The evidence demonstrates that the burglary was committed for the purpose of committing the theft;  sentence on the grand theft should, as a result, be stayed pursuant to Penal Code section 654.   As a result, the maximum term of confinement should be six years.

DISPOSITION

The disposition is reversed, and the juvenile court is directed to set a maximum term of confinement of six years;  the order sustaining the petition is affirmed in all other respects.

We concur:

PERLUSS, P. J. WOODS, J.