Alberto E.
Filed 6/4/13 In re Alberto E. 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NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
ALBERTO E., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
ALBERTO
E.,
Defendant and
Appellant.
F065759
(Super.
Ct. No. 12JQ0034)
THE COURT
name="_ftnref1" title="">*
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court of
Courtney M.
Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of
the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
In March 2012, appellant, Alberto E., a minor, admitted
an allegation set forth in a juvenile wardship petition that he committed the
offense commonly known as active participation in a
186.22, subd. (a)). At the disposition
hearing later that month, the juvenile court adjudged appellant a ward of the
court; declared the offense to be a felony; placed appellant on probation, with
various terms and conditions; and ordered him committed to the Kings County
Juvenile Academy Alpha Program (Alpha Program) for a period of 90 days to one
year.
In June
2012, it was alleged appellant violated his probation by failing to comply with
the rules and regulations of the Alpha Program.
At the hearing in July 2012, appellant admitted the allegation. At the subsequent disposition hearing held
later that month, the court readjudged appellant a ward of the court, continued
him on probation and ordered him committed to the Kings County Juvenile Academy
Impact Program for a period of 180 days to one year. Appellant appeals from this most recent
disposition order.
Appellant’s appointed appellate
counsel has filed an opening brief
which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no
issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
Appellant has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit
additional briefing. We affirm.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Alpha Program reports indicate
that between March 19, 2012, and June 11, 2012, appellant violated Alpha
Program rules and regulations in that he, inter alia, engaged in “disruptive
behavior in class,†failed to obey orders by staff members, refused to take
medication, engaged in “horse playing,†was “trying to pull the pants down of
cadets walking by,†told a staff member “‘fuck it,â€â€™ and “‘fuck the program’â€
when told by staff that he would be receiving a disciplinary “write up,†spoke
to a staff member in a “disrespectful tone,†spoke to another cadet “in a
hostile tone,†“argued back to staff,†engaged in “horseplay†that “appear[ed]
to be ... gang related†(unnecessary capitalization omitted), “intentionally
bumped†another cadet, and “started to call [another cadet] ‘D.O.’, which
stands for ‘Drop Out’ because he no longer affiliates with the Norteno
gang.â€
A “PROGRAM
FAILURE REPORT†dated June 20, 2012, states the following: Appellant “has been a habitual behavioral
problem.†Two days after one of his five
“Discipline Board†sessions, he “assaulted another minor, totally
unprovoked.†Appellant is “deemed to be
a program failure.â€
DISCUSSION
Following independent review of the
record, we have concluded that no other reasonably
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
name="_ftn1" title="">* Before
Cornell, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Franson, J.
