Filed 6/23/26 In re M.G. CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re M.G., a Person Coming Under the H053192
Juvenile Court Law. (Santa Clara County
Super. Ct. No. 22JV45850A)
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
M.G.,
Defendant and Appellant.
The juvenile court adjudged M.G. a ward of the court after finding he possessed a
knife on school grounds and committed vandalism. The juvenile court placed M.G. on
home probation. Following a contested hearing, the court ordered M.G. to pay $8,260.70
in restitution, but it later apportioned M.G.’s share of restitution to half this amount,
$4,130.35.
On appeal from the initial restitution order, M.G.’s appointed counsel has filed a
brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) that states the case and
facts but raises no issues. This court notified M.G. of his right to submit written
argument on his own behalf within 30 days. That period has elapsed, and we have
received no response from M.G.
Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th
106 (Kelly), we have carefully reviewed the entire record and have determined there are
no arguable issues on appeal that would result in a disposition more favorable to M.G.
Accordingly, we will affirm the juvenile court’s restitution order.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
M.G. possessed a knife with a four-inch blade at his middle school. A search of
M.G. pursuant to a “vape detector” alert in the bathroom found the knife clipped to
M.G.’s shorts under his pants. The month prior, M.G. went to a gaming kiosk in a
shopping mall and pushed a virtual reality gaming machine back and forth, damaging the
machine. M.G. and other boys returned several times to the gaming kiosk and continued
to shake the machines. M.G. was 12 years old at the time of the offenses.
The juvenile court found true allegations that M.G. brought or possessed a knife
on school grounds (Pen. Code, § 626.10, subd. (a)(1); count 1) and committed vandalism
of $400 or more (id., § 594, subd. (a); count 2). The juvenile court determined that both
offenses were felonies under Welfare and Institutions Code section 702. The juvenile
court placed M.G. on home probation in addition to imposing other requirements.
At a contested hearing concerning restitution, the victim in the gaming kiosk
incident testified that he paid $8,000 to replace the machine that the boys damaged, and
incurred additional costs to store the machine after it was damaged. The court ordered
$8,260.70 in restitution, explaining its calculation of the additional $260.70 in restitution
beyond the $8,000 to replace the machine. M.G. did not timely file a notice of appeal
following the juvenile court’s restitution order, but this court granted M.G.’s application
for relief from default and accepted his notice of appeal as timely filed.
Several months later, the juvenile court conducted a restitution review at which
M.G. requested apportionment of the restitution amount due to the participation of at
least one other boy in the vandalism. The juvenile court apportioned M.G.’s liability in
the amount M.G. requested, $4,130.35.
2
II. DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th 106, we
have carefully reviewed the entire record. We conclude there is no arguable issue on
appeal that would result in a disposition more favorable to M.G. (Wende, supra, at
pp. 441-443.)
III. DISPOSITION
The juvenile court’s restitution order is affirmed.
3
_______________________________
Greenwood, P. J.
WE CONCUR:
______________________________________
Danner, J.
______________________________________
Bromberg, J.
H053192 In re M.G.