In re M.B.
Filed 11/13/08 In re M.B. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re M.B., a Person Coming Under The Juvenile Court Law. | |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. M.B., Defendant and Appellant. | F055017 (Super. Ct. No. JW116726-00) O P I N I O N |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Peter A. Warmerdam, Juvenile Court Referee.
Richard D. Runcie, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
It was alleged in a juvenile wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602) filed January 16, 2008, that appellant M.B., a minor, committed three felony offenses, viz., carjacking (Pen. Code, 215, subd. (a), count 1), kidnapping (Pen. Code, 207, subd. (a), count 2) and second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 211, 212.5, subd. (c), count 3), and that in committing each offense, he personally inflicted great bodily injury on the victim (Pen. Code, 12022.7, subd. (a)). At the time set for the jurisdiction hearing on February 7, 2008, appellant admitted count 3 and the court dismissed the remaining counts and all enhancement allegations. At the disposition hearing on February 25, 2008, the juvenile court adjudged appellant a ward of the court; found that the instant offense was one listed under Welfare and Institutions Code section 707, subdivision (b); ordered appellant committed to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Juvenile Justice; and declared appellants maximum period of physical confinement to be five years.
Appellants appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (Peoplev.Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant has not responded to this courts invitation to submit additional briefing. We will affirm.
FACTS[1]
On January 13, 2008, at a truck stop in the area of Lebec, a woman was in the backseat of her car, attempting to secure her dog, when appellant, age 14, got into the car and sat in the drivers seat. The victim began yelling and slapping and punching appellant, but he was nonetheless able to start the car and begin driving. The victim was able to stop the car by putting it in park and pulling the emergency brake, at which point appellant got out of the car, ran around to the passenger side and attempted to steal [the victims] purse. In the ensuing struggle, appellant punched the victim in the face, causing her to let go of the purse. Appellant then fled the scene on foot, with the victims purse in hand. Several witnesses pursued appellant to a nearby gas station, where he was eventually detained by responding adult civilians. Shortly thereafter, law enforcement officers arrived on the scene and took appellant into custody.
DISCUSSION
Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.
Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line Lawyers.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
*Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.
[1] Our factual statement is based on the factual statement in the report of the probation officer, which is in turn based on Kern County Sheriffs Department crime reports.
