In In re Luis B. (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1117, the Court discussed the need for the juvenile court to exercise its discretion to determine whether a minor is suitable for DEJ. The juvenile court there found after a contested jurisdictional hearing that the minor had committed certain offenses, including a felony. (Id. at p. 1120.) The district attorney failed to determine whether the minor was eligible for DEJ and provide notice, and the juvenile court did not conduct an inquiry into his suitability. (Id. at p. 1123.) The court concluded--and the Attorney General conceded--that failure to consider the minor for DEJ was error. (Id. at p. 1121.) In reaching this conclusion, the court noted that the trial court has ultimate discretion to rule on the suitability of the minor for DEJ, and stated: "The court may grant DEJ to the minor summarily under appropriate circumstances , and if not must conduct a hearing at which 'the court shall consider the declaration of the prosecuting attorney, any report and recommendations from the probation department, and any other relevant material provided by the child or other interested parties.' While the court retains discretion to deny DEJ to an eligible minor, the duty of the prosecuting attorney to assess the eligibility of the minor for DEJ and furnish notice with the petition is mandatory, as is the duty of the juvenile court to either summarily grant DEJ or examine the record, conduct a hearing, and make 'the final determination regarding education, treatment, and rehabilitation ... .' ... The court is not required to ultimately grant DEJ, but is required to at least follow specified procedures and exercise discretion to reach a final determination once the mandatory threshold eligibility determination is made. " (Luis B., supra, 142 Cal.App.4th at p. 1123.)