In re Alex S.





















Filed 3/8/13 In re Alex S. CA4/1











NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115>.





COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION ONE



STATE OF CALIFORNIA






>

In re ALEX S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ALEX S., Defendant and Appellant.	D062089 (Super. Ct. No. J231172)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior
Court of href="http://www.adrservices.org/neutrals/frederick-mandabach.php">San Diego
County, Carlos Armour, Judge.
Affirmed.



A petition was filed in the
juvenile court accusing Alex S. (the minor) of battery in violation of Penal
Code section 242. Following an href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">adjudication hearing the court found the
allegations in the petition to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. The minor was placed on probation.



FACTS

Janet J., the minor's aunt,
testified that the minor had been staying with her. For approximately a week and a half, the
minor had not returned home, but on February
8, 2012, the minor returned home and Janet J. tried to stop her
from leaving with some bags. An
altercation ensued, during which the minor pushed Janet J. to the floor and
stabbed her left palm with a knife.
Janet J. went to the hospital and required an X-ray. The minor testified that Janet J. pushed her
to the ground to prevent her from leaving, and Janet J. grabbed a knife and
used it to cut the bags. The minor
denied stabbing her aunt with the knife.

DISCUSSION

Appointed counsel has filed a brief
summarizing the facts and proceedings below.
Counsel presents no argument for reversal, but asks this court to review
the record as mandated by href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to >Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S.
738, counsel refers to as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether there was sufficient evidence to
support the finding on the battery charge; (2) whether all of the probation
conditions imposed on the minor were valid; and (3) whether the fines, fees,
and restitution were properly assessed.

We granted the minor permission to
file a brief on her own behalf. She has
not responded.

A review of the record pursuant to >People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders
v. California, >supra, 386 U.S. 738, including the
possible issues referred to by appellate counsel, has disclosed no reasonably
arguable appellate issues. The minor has
been adequately represented by counsel on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.







O'ROURKE, J.



WE CONCUR:







McINTYRE,
Acting P. J.







AARON,
J.