From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re C.R.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Jun 4, 2014
No. B251171 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 4, 2014)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. FJ47413 Robert Totten, Judge.

Arielle Bases, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


MINK, J.

Retired Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Appellant C.R. admitted the allegation that he had committed a robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211. The juvenile court sustained the petition, found appellant was a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, adjudged appellant to be a ward of the court, and ordered appellant to camp placement for a term of six months, with a maximum term of confinement of 4 years.

Following his release from camp, appellant failed to report to his probation officer and failed to attend a court hearing. Appellant admitted his violation of probation, the court found the Welfare and Institutions Code section 777 notice of violation true and ordered suitable placement in Rite of Passage of Sierra Ridge.

Appellant appeals from the juvenile court’s order. Finding no error, we affirm.

Facts

Because appellant admitted committing the robbery, the facts of the robbery are not found in the record. Similarly, appellant admitted violating probation by not reporting to his probation officer and no further details are found in the record.

Discussion

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. Appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and requested this court to independently review the record on appeal to determine whether any arguable issues exist.

On January 23, 2014, we advised appellant he had 30 days in which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied appellant’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)

Disposition

The juvenile court’s order is affirmed.

We concur: MOSK, ACTING P. J.KRIEGLER, J.


Summaries of

In re C.R.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Jun 4, 2014
No. B251171 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 4, 2014)
Case details for

In re C.R.

Case Details

Full title:In re C.R., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division

Date published: Jun 4, 2014

Citations

No. B251171 (Cal. Ct. App. Jun. 4, 2014)