In re R.V.























Filed 12/10/12 In
re R.V. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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 R.V., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. R.V., Defendant and Appellant.	C070998 (Super. Ct. No. 67922)

On
February 5,
2010, a petition was filed under Welfare
and Institutions Code section 602, subdivision (a), charging 15-year-old R.V.
(the minor) with robbery (count 1; Pen. Code, § 211), href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">assault with a deadly weapon (counts 2
& 3; Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)), href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">brandishing a knife (count 4; Pen. Code,
§ 417, subd. (a)(1)), and street terrorism (count 5; Pen. Code,
§ 186.22, subd. (a)). As to count
5, it was alleged that the minor committed the offense to benefit a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">criminal street gang. (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b).) All offenses were alleged to have been
committed on or about February 3, 2010.

On
February 8,
2010, a subsequent petition charged the
minor with unlawful taking or driving of
a vehicle (count 1; Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), receiving a motor
vehicle as stolen property (count 2; Pen. Code, § 496d, subd. (a)), petty
theft (count 3; Pen. Code, § 484), and receiving stolen property (count 4;
Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)). All
offenses were alleged to have been committed on or about December 3, 2009.

On
June 28,
2010, the minor admitted one felony count
of assault with a deadly weapon
(count 2 on the original petition) and the remaining allegations were
dismissed. The factual basis for the
admission, as stated in the detention report, is that on February 3, 2010, when store employees confronted the minor because he had concealed
an item of merchandise on his person, he brandished a knife and threatened to
“cut” them.

On
August 10,
2010, the juvenile court adjudicated the
minor a ward of the court, placed him on probation, and ordered him to complete
the Reconnect Program. Thereafter, three
petitions alleging probation violations were filed against the minor.

After
two failed out-of-home placements, the minor was terminated from the Reconnect
Program and detained in juvenile hall.

On
March 16,
2012, the juvenile court granted the
probation officer’s petition requesting the administration of href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">psychotropic medication to
the minor.

On
April 12,
2012, a petition was filed seeking the
modification of prior orders (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 739.5) so as to
delegate the administration of psychotropic drugs to the minor’s parents. On April 13, 2012, over the minor’s objection, the juvenile court granted the
petition.

On
April 25,
2012, the minor filed a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">notice of appeal from the order granting
the petition.

We
appointed counsel to represent
defendant on appeal. 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 href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.com/">arguable issues on appeal. (People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
Defendant 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 defendant. 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.







HULL , J.







We
concur:







BLEASE ,
Acting P. J.







MAURO ,
J.