In re Oscar S.
Filed 5/21/13 In re Oscar S. CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(San
Joaquin)
In re OSCAR S., a
Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
OSCAR S.,
Defendant and Appellant.
C070434
(Super. Ct. No. 68295)
The
juvenile court sustained a petition pursuant to ADDIN
BA xc <@st> xl 39 s FOJJBC000001 l "Welfare & Institutions Code section 602" Welfare and
Institutions Code section 602 charging the minor, Oscar S., with
of burglary tools ( ADDIN BA xc <@st> xl 16 s
FOJJBC000002 xpl 1 l "Pen. Code, § 466"
Pen. Code, § 466),
FOJJBC000006 xpl 1 l "§ 594, subd. (a)"
§ 594, subd. (a)),
and prowling (
ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 16 s FOJJBC000007 xpl 1 l "§ 647, subd. (h)" § 647, subd. (h)). He was adjudged a ward of the court and
placed on probation. He appeals these
findings and orders. Counsel filed an
brief that sets forth the facts of the case and
requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any
arguable issues on appeal. ( ADDIN BA xc <@cs> xl 36 s
FOJJBC000003 xhfl Rep xpl 1 l "
Cal.3d 436" People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; ADDIN
BA xc <@cs> xl 40 s FOJJBC000004 xhfl Rep xpl 1 l "In re Kevin S. (2003)
BACKGROUND
Thomas Dickey lived across the
street from the yard of Bob’s Towing.
One night in August 2011 he was awakened by his dogs barking. He looked out his window and saw two males
doing something at the Bob’s Towing fence.
One male was a thinly built Hispanic and the other had a thicker build. Dickey could not see their faces or anything
in their hands. He called 911. As he continued to watch, it appeared one
person came through the fence. Dickey
believed they were breaking into the tow yard.
Deputy Justin Millmore was
dispatched to the scene. The only person
he saw in the area was the minor as he was walking from the area of Bob’s
Towing. Deputy Millmore asked what the
minor was doing and the minor answered he was showing a friend a car at the tow
yard. Deputy Millmore asked the minor if
he was inside the yard looking at the car and the minor answered “Well, kind
of.†Deputy Millmore then detained the
minor in the patrol car.
Deputy Millmore inspected the
entrance to the tow yard and found two holes in the surrounding fences. The holes were cut large enough for someone
to duck into, approximately three to four feet.
The holes appeared to have been caused by cutting the chain links in the
fence. Deputy Millmore also inspected
the area where he first saw the minor and found a Nikon binocular bag with a
pair of bolt cutters and a tire iron.
Deputy Millmore searched the SUV the minor had claimed to be returning
to and found a pair of Nikon binoculars without a case.
The owner of Bob’s Towing inspected
the property. The fences to his business
and the adjoining business had been cut, but nothing appeared to be missing.
A petition was filed charging the
minor with felony charges of attempted second degree burglary ( ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 10 s
FOJJBC000008 xpl 1 l "§§ 664/459"
§§ 664, 459)
and conspiracy to commit burglary ( ADDIN BA xc <@osdv> xl 19 s
FOJJBC000009 xpl 1 l "§ 182, subd. (a)(1)"
§ 182, subd.
(a)(1)), and misdemeanor charges of possession of burglary tools ( ADDIN BA xc <@$st> xl 5 s
FOJJBC000002 xpl 1 § 466),
vandalism (
ADDIN BA xc <@$osdv> xl 16 s FOJJBC000006 xpl 1 § 594, subd. (a)),
and prowling (
ADDIN BA xc <@$osdv> xl 16 s FOJJBC000007 xpl 1 § 647, subd. (h)). The minor filed a
to suppress, which was denied. Following a contested jurisdictional hearing,
the court found the allegations of attempted burglary and conspiracy not true
and the allegations of possession of burglary tools, vandalism, and prowling
true beyond a reasonable doubt. Pending
disposition, additional charges were filed in Stanislaus County, alleging a
June 2011 second degree burglary. The
minor admitted a misdemeanor second degree auto burglary in that case. His mother’s boyfriend was found to be a
codefendant and a stay-away order was recommended. The case was transferred to
for disposition.
At the dispositional hearing, the
minor was adjudged a ward of the court and placed on probation. The juvenile court committed him to juvenile
hall for 41 days with credit for 41 days served and ordered the minor to
participate in a work project while committed.
The court suspended an additional 90 days upon successful completion of
the Reconnect Program. The court ordered
the minor to complete an additional 30 days of electronic monitoring following
his time in juvenile hall. Among the
terms and conditions of probation, the court ordered the minor to pay $1,050 in
restitution to Maisie Rodas
determined to Bob’s Towing. The court
issued stay-away orders as to the victims Rodas and Bob’s Towing as well as the
codefendant.
DISCUSSION
The minor was advised by counsel of
the right to file a supplemental brief
within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no
communication from the minor. Having
undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that
would result in a disposition more favorable to the minor.
DISPOSITION
The findings and orders are
affirmed.
BLEASE , Acting
P. J.
We concur:
HULL , J.
MAURO , J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] Further undesignated statutory
references are to the ADDIN BA xc <@ost> xl 10 s
FOJJBC000005 l "Penal
Code" Penal Code.
name="_ftn2" title="">[2] Maisie Rodas was the victim of the
Stanislaus burglary.
