In re Jorge B.
Filed 2/11/10 In re Jorge B. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 JORGE B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B217949 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GJ27059) |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JORGE B., Defendant and Appellant. |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.
Robert Leventer, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art VI, 21.) Dismissed.
California Appellate Project, John B. Steiner and Dee A. Hayashi, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
A petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 (undesignated section references are to that code) charged appellant, Jorge B., in count 1 with possessing marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11359), and in count 2 with giving a false identity to a peace officer (Pen. Code, 148.9). After the juvenile court denied appellants motion to suppress evidence under section 700.1, appellant admitted count 1 and the court dismissed count 2. The court then granted deferred entry of judgment, pursuant section 790 et seq., and ordered appellant home on probation for 12 to 36 months.[1] Appellant filed a notice of appeal, which stated he was appealing from the denial of his motion under section 700.1
We appointed counsel to represent appellant. Counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442. On November 6, 2009, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or argument he wished this court to consider. No response has been received to date.
The evidence on appellants motion to suppress showed that at about 8:00 p.m. on January 20, 2009, Glendale Police Officer Jose Barajas and his partner were patrolling Pacific Park in Glendale. In an area where members of a street gang often congregated, Officer Barajas recognized two members of the gang, seated near eight other persons, including appellant and his girlfriend, Brenda C. More officers arrived, and they detained the individuals and patted down the males for weapons. Officer Rebecca Lopez was called to check appellants girlfriend for weapons, and she immediately observed two tube-shaped objects protruding from Brenda C.s bra area. The officer removed the objects and found them to be prescription bottles containing marijuana. After Brenda C. stated she did not have identification, Officer Lopez removed from Ms. C.s back pocket a scale, which initially had appeared to be a wallet.
Appellant testified that when the police arrived, he handed Brenda C. the marijuana and scale to hold. The juvenile court denied the motion to suppress, ruling that appellant did not have either standing to contest the search or a reasonable expectation of privacy in location where the contraband was found.
This court lacks jurisdiction over appellants appeal. An appeal does not lie from, or following, an order deferring entry of judgment under section 790 et seq. (In re Mario C. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1303, 1307-1309.)[2] Although appellants notice of appeal refers to the order denying his motion to suppress, such a denial may be reviewed only on an appeal from a judgment, of which there presently is none. ( 800, subd. (a); In re Mario C., supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1308-1309.)
The appeal is dismissed.
LICHTMAN, J.*
We concur:
BIGELOW, P. J.
RUBIN, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] Even though appellant was not removed from parental custody, the minute order stated he could be held in physical confinement for more than three years. (See 726, subd. (c).)
[2] After announcing it would proceed by way of deferred entry of judgment, the juvenile court stated, Practical matter there may not be an appeal; is he aware of that?
* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
