Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. No. TJ19556 Catherine J. Pratt, Commissioner.
Stephen Borgo, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
CHANEY, J.
On June 15, 2011, appellant, age 17, attacked Laura P. without provocation, beating her several times with her closed fist and vandalizing her car. In an amended petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 (section 602), the District Attorney alleged one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211), one count of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)), one felony count of making criminal threats (§ 422), one count of misdemeanor battery (§ 242) and one count of misdemeanor vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a).) Appellant denied the allegations.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
The adjudication commenced on November 4, 2011. Before testimony, the juvenile court granted appellant’s motion to dismiss the criminal threats count.
The victim testified that while she was talking to William Cook, the father of her one-week-old child, appellant, Cook’s girlfriend, blindsided her with a punch to the face, grabbed her hair, and punched her several more times. Appellant then retrieved a metal pole from her car and smashed the passenger mirror of the victim’s car. Appellant testified that the victim attacked her first, and she merely defended herself. Appellant further testified the victim’s mirror was smashed not by appellant, but by Cook’s mother, who was also present.
At the close of the People’s evidence, the court granted appellant’s motion to dismiss the robbery count. After the victim, an investigating police officer, and appellant testified, the court sustained the petition on the three remaining counts, expressly finding the victim’s testimony “was more credible” than appellant’s. After a probation report was admitted which indicated appellant had suffered two prior sustained section 602 petitions for battery, appellant was declared a ward of the court, placed on home probation, and ordered to perform community service and participate in anger management classes.
Appellant timely appealed the judgment, contending the evidence was insufficient to sustain the petition.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. After examination of the record, appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues, and asking this court to independently review the record. On March 22, 2012, we advised appellant she had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues she wished us to consider. To date, we have received no response.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s counsel has fully complied with his responsibilities, and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278-280; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: MALLANO, P. J., JOHNSON, J.