In re O.P.
Filed 12/8/08 In re O.P. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 O.P, a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | C058540 |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. O.P., Defendant and Appellant. | (Super. Ct. No. 64296) |
The minor, O.P., appeals from the findings made at the contested jurisdictional and dispositional hearings that he committed a felony burglary and that five prior offenses had been sustained against him. Counsel filed an opening 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. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; In re Kevin S. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 97.) We shall affirm.
BACKGROUND
At approximately 12:00 p.m. on November 28, 2007, Desjaun Jones-Wittingham was asleep in his bedroom on the second floor of his two-story home. When he awoke, he heard voices, and when his bedroom door was opened, he recognized a friend of his brother, O.P. Desjaun jumped out of bed and chased O. down the stairs, and saw him go out the kitchen window. Desjaun heard a crashing noise upstairs and recognized a second intruder in the home, Paul, as he kicked out a window screen and jumped out the window. As the intruders ran away, Desjaun heard one ask, Did you get the X-Box? and the other responded, Yeah, I got one. Later, Desjaun looked out the window and saw a PlayStation and three controllers on the ground. He later discovered one of the X-Boxes, a number of games, two cameras, his fathers watches, and a pair shoes were missing. A game card from this PlayStation was later found in Pauls possession.
O.s uncle, aunt, and mother each testified, giving the minor an alibi. O.s aunt and uncle testified that the minor had come to their house on November 28, 2007, at approximately 11:45 a.m. and stayed until about 12:30 p.m. The minors uncle then took the minor home; his mother testified that he remained home for the rest of the day.
O. denied burglarizing the Jones-Wittingham house on November 28, 2007. He testified he had gone to his aunts house at approximately 11:40 a.m., stayed until about 12:10 p.m., and then his uncle drove him home.
On November 30, 2007, a petition was filed alleging the minor had committed first degree burglary. After a contested jurisdictional hearing, the court found the burglary allegation true.
On February 29, 2008, as a result of a separate incident, a separate petition was filed alleging the minor had committed two counts of robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, and a misdemeanor battery. The minor admitted one of the robbery counts, and the remaining counts were dismissed.
The dispositional hearing for both petitions was held on March 14, 2008. The court continued the minor as a ward of the court and ordered general placement. The court determined the maximum confinement time was seven years six months and imposed various terms and conditions of probation.
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 defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
RAYE , J.
We concur:
SCOTLAND , P. J.
ROBIE , J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.
