In re Steven T. CA1/4

── In re Steven T. CA1/4 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: May 28, 2026 Category: General Filed 5/28/26 In re Steven T. CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR In re STEVEN T., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, A174040 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. v. No. J2300295) STEVEN T., Defendant and Appellant. Steven T., who is confined at a secure youth treatment facility, appeals from a six-month review order under Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 875. Steven’s appointed appellate counsel filed a brief seeking our independent review of the record for arguable issues pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Counsel apprised Steven of his right to file a supplemental brief, but he did not do so. Having reviewed the record, we find no arguable issues and affirm. 2 1 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 We grant Steven’s request that we take judicial notice of the clerk’s transcript filed on August 15, 2024, in Steven’s appeal from the juvenile court’s July 2024 order (A171002). 1  BACKGROUND In January 2024, after then-16-year-old Steven T. pled no contest to kidnaping (Pen. Code., § 207), with an enhancement for infliction of great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)), the juvenile court adjudged him a ward of the court and committed him under Welfare and Institutions Code section 875 to the Briones Youth Academy (BYA), a secure youth treatment facility, with a baseline term of confinement of five years. This court affirmed the disposition in a prior appeal. (In re Steven T. (Feb. 20, 2025, A169884) [nonpub. opn.].) Section 875, subdivision (e), required the juvenile court to hold review hearings at least every six months to evaluate Steven’s rehabilitative progress and determine whether to modify his baseline term of confinement. In July 2024, the juvenile court conducted Steven’s first six-month review hearing and issued an order that praised him for his progress but denied his request for a baseline term reduction. We affirmed the order. (In re Steven T. (Sept. 24, 2025, A171002 [nonpub. opn.].) In January 2025, the juvenile court conducted Steven’s second six-month review hearing and reduced his baseline term of confinement by 60 days based on the probation department’s positive report, Steven’s progress, and the programming he still needed to complete. (In re Steven T. (Oct. 17, 2025, A172664 [nonpub. opn.].) We affirmed that order as well. (Ibid.) On July 17, 2025, the juvenile court conducted Steven’s third six-month review hearing, resulting in the order from which Steven now appeals. The court read and considered the probation department’s report; it admitted into evidence a letter from the victim and a compilation of logs and essays by Steven; and it heard from the People, Steven’s counsel, a probation officer, an adaptive living skills instructor working with Steven, and Steven himself. 2 The probation report stated that Steven generally had maintained good behavior, but it also disclosed that Steven had misused a computer. As a result, Steven was returned to a more restrictive housing unit. During the