In re Victor M.
Filed 1/17/13 In re Victor M. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re VICTOR
M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
VICTOR M.,
Defendant and Appellant.
F065101
(Super. Ct. No. 10CEJ600197-2)
THE COURT
APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of
County. Rosendo Peña, Jr., Judge.
Allan
Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office
of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
-ooOoo-
>
The court readjudged appellant, Victor M., a ward of the court
(Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) after appellant admitted allegations charging
him with receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)). Following independent
review of the record pursuant to People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On
May 1, 2012, Fresno Police officers, responding to a burglary in progress at
John Muir Elementary School, saw a person, later identified as appellant,
walking with some items in his hands.
Upon seeing the officers, appellant began running away and dropping
items. Appellant was detained
immediately after he stopped running and dropped the remaining items he was
carrying. Appellant had a small cut on
his left wrist and two small cuts on his thumb.
He admitted that he “got into the school.â€
The school’s
maintenance supervisor responded to the scene and identified the property
recovered from appellant as property from the school. He also estimated that it would cost
approximately $350 to repair a window that had been broken at the school.
On May 2, 2012,
the district attorney filed a petition charging appellant with second degree
burglary (count 1/Pen. Code, §§ 459/460, subd. (b)) and receiving stolen
property (count 2).
On May 10, 2012,
appellant admitted the receiving stolen
property offense in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining count.
On March 24,
2012, the court declared appellant’s offense to be a felony, set his maximum
period of confinement at three years, and committed him to the Juvenile Justice
Campus for 180 days.
Appellant’s
counsel on appeal has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations
to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review
the record. (People v. Wende, supra,
25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant had not
responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following
an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably
DISPOSITION
The judgment is
affirmed.
name="_ftn1" title="">* Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Franson, J.
