In re D.C.
Filed 3/20/13 In re D.C. CA1/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
FIVE
Juvenile Court Law.
and Respondent,
and Appellant.
A136140
(
Super.
D.C.
appeals from an order continuing him as a ward of the juvenile court and
placing him outside his mother’s home.
(Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 602.)
His court-appointed counsel has filed an
seeking our independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and
(Anders), a procedure that is
applicable to juvenile delinquency
proceedings (In re Kevin S.
(2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 97, 99). We find
no arguable issues and affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
Appellant
has been in the juvenile justice system since he was 13 years old. Born to a teenage mother who has had
difficulties controlling him, he has had juvenile adjudications for felony
grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (c)), uttering offensive words (Pen.
Code, § 415, subd. (3)), battery (Pen. Code, § 242), misdemeanor receiving
stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor assault by
means likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). Since his initial contact with the juvenile
court, he has alternated between out-of-home placements and his mother’s home.
On
May 31, 2012, when
appellant was 16 years old, the district attorney filed the most recent
wardship petition alleging that appellant committed a
(c).) A contested jurisdictional hearing
was held, at which the following evidence was presented:
On
the evening of May 30, 2012,
Carol R. was standing near the intersection of Powell and Ellis streets in San
Francisco when appellant yanked her purse off her
shoulder with sufficient force to turn her around and drag her to the
ground. As he ran away with the purse,
appellant was knocked to the ground by a bystander. A second bystander, Graham D., tackled
appellant after he attempted to flee and held him by the legs. Appellant said he didn’t want the purse
anymore. Police officers arrived within
a few minutes and took custody of appellant.
The victim identified appellant at the scene, though she could not do so
at the jurisdictional hearing. Graham D., identified appellant at the
hearing.
The
trial court sustained the wardship petition and ordered appellant committed to
the probation department for out-of-home placement. A multidisciplinary team report recommended
that appellant be placed in the Woodward
Academy in Iowa
for approximately 18 months. Appellant
and his mother agreed to this recommendation and the court approved the
placement.
II. DISCUSSION
As
required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40
Cal.4th 106, 124, we affirmatively note that appointed counsel has filed a
that defendant has been advised of his right to file a
filed such a brief. We have
independently reviewed the entire record for potential error and find none.
Substantial
evidence supports the juvenile court’s determination that appellant committed a
second degree robbery. (See
1359, 1371-1372.) The out-of-home
placement order was also supported by substantial evidence and was not an abuse
of discretion. (See In re Robert H. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1317, 1329-1330.) On appellant’s application, the juvenile
court has corrected the number of days credited to appellant for time served.
We
are satisfied that appellant’s appointed attorney has fully complied with the
responsibilities of appellate counsel and that no
v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S.
259, 283.)
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
NEEDHAM,
J.
We concur.
JONES, P. J.
BRUINIERS, J.
