In re E.J.
Filed 11/18/08 In re E.J. CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
In re E.J., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B206874 |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. E.J., Defendant and Appellant. | (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. JJ15755) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. S. Robert Ambrose, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed.
Bruce G. Finebaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________________
On December 6, 2007, Sheriff Antonio Guillen and his partner received several calls of numerous people hanging around the area [of 7933 Morton Avenue], using and selling drugs. When the officers got on the street, Sheriff Guillen saw several males hanging around a Honda. As the officers approached the area, the males around the Honda tried to disassociate themselves from the vehicle by walking away. When the officers got closer to the Honda, Deputy Guillen observed two other individuals inside the vehicle, both of who began to slide down in their seats as to try to hide. Based on the activity he had witnessed, and his knowledge that there had been arrests in area for narcotics, vehicle thefts, and gang crimes, Sheriff Guillen and his partner contacted the two people in the Honda, one of who was E.J. Sheriff Guillens partner engaged in a small conversation [with E.J.] . . . like whose car [is this], who lives here, and then asked E.J. if he had anything illegal. E.J. answered that he had a little bit of weed. Deputy Guillens partner then searched E.J. in Deputy Guillens presence, and the officers recovered a plastic bag containing marijuana from E.J.s right front pants pocket, along with $104.
On February 5, 2008, the People filed a petition alleging that E.J. had committed the offense of possession of marijuana for sale. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602; Health & Saf. Code, 11359.) E.J. filed a motion to suppress the marijuana. (Welf. & Inst., 700.1.) At a hearing on March 5, 2008, the People presented evidence (Deputy Guillens testimony) establishing the facts summarized above. The juvenile court denied E.J.s motion. E.J. then admitted to the allegation and the juvenile court declared E.J. a ward of the court and placed him on deferred entry of judgment probation pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code section 790, subdivision (a). The court declared the maximum period of confinement to be three years.
E.J. filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent E.J. On September 9, 2008, E.J.s appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On September 10, 2008, we notified E.J. by letter that he could submit within 30 days any ground of appeal, argument or contention which he wished us to consider. E.J. has not responded to our letter. We have independently reviewed the record and are satisfied that E.J.s appointed counsel has fulfilled his duty, and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
BIGELOW, J.
We concur:
COOPER, P. J.
FLIER, J.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
