In re J. S.















Filed 11/4/10 In re J. S. CA4/3







NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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



FOURTH APPELLATE
DISTRICT



DIVISION THREE




>

In re J. S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. J. S., Defendant and Appellant.	G043171 (Super. Ct. No. DL034320) O P I N I O N

Appeal from a judgment
of the Superior Court
of Orange
County, Kimberly Menninger, Judge. Affirmed.

James M. Crawford, under
appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr.,
Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W.
Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Rhonda Cartwright-Ladendorf and Marissa
Bejarano, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Following a contested jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile
court sustained a petition alleging J. S., a minor, committed arson. It declared him a ward of the court and
placed him on probation. Defendant
contends the court's exclusion of third party culpability evidence deprived him
of his right to present a defense.
Finding no error, we affirm.



FACTS



In January 2009, a male
student at a high school entered the boy's restroom where he saw defendant
standing at a urinal and smoke coming from the handicap stall. Defendant was still standing there when the
student left.

Responding to the fire,
a district safety officer entered the restroom and saw defendant running
out. Several separate fires were burning
in the restroom at that time and no one else was present. The fires had been intentionally set.

Defendant was
interviewed later that day based on a report he was showing a photograph of the
fire on his cell phone to other students.
A search of his person revealed a lighter and a cell phone containing a
photograph of the fire.



DISCUSSION



During trial, defense
counsel sought to introduce evidence of two other fires at the high school,
claiming they were identical to the fire in the present case. Her offer of proof was that â€