From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re D.S.

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Jan 30, 2009
No. E045993 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2009)

Opinion


In re D.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D.S., Defendant and Appellant. E045993 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Second Division January 30, 2009

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County No. J213407. Michael A. Knish, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.).

Mark Yanis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

Gaut, Acting P.J.

D.S. (the minor) appeals following an initial disposition order removing her from her mother’s custody and placing her in the custody of the probation department, detained in juvenile hall pending identification of appropriate out-of-home placement.

BACKGROUND

Between March 8, 2007, and April 2, 2008, three original wardship petitions (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) were filed, alleging the minor had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute crimes. The first petition involved allegations of aggravated assault. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1).) The incident involved a fight with another teenaged girl in which the minor used a knife. The second petition alleged vandalism, arising from an incident in which the minor threw a bolt and broke a window. (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (b)(1).) The third petition was sustained as to one count of grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487), following an incident in which the minor and a companion stole a golf cart.

Prior to the filing of the third wardship petition, the minor had been maintained in her mother’s home on probation. However, throughout her probationary period, the minor smoked marijuana, took her mother’s Vicodin without the mother’s knowledge, failed to apprise the probation officer of her correct home address, and failed to regularly attend school. The minor attempted to justify her drug use as treatment for chronic nausea, and was known to have a cyst on her spleen as well as scoliosis. However, contact with her physician revealed drugs were not prescribed and treatment for the scoliosis had been refused.

The minor’s and her mother’s uncooperative conduct gave rise to a petition to revoke probation. The minor was detained in juvenile hall. On April 9, 2008, the minor admitted the allegation of the third original petition, as well as the violation of probation. The minor was removed from her mother’s custody. On April 14, 2008, the minor was evaluated by a psychologist who diagnosed the minor with depressive disorder, conduct disorder, cannabis abuse, and borderline personality traits. On May 7, 2008, a dispositional hearing was held. The minor’s custody was awarded to the probation department and the minor was ordered to remain in juvenile hall while awaiting placement in a suitable facility.

The minor filed her notice of appeal on June 16, 2008.

DISCUSSION

At her request, this court appointed counsel to represent the minor on appeal. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493], setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues, and requesting that we undertake an independent review of the entire record. We offered the minor an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but she has not done so.

Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record, including the proceedings occurring after the filing of the notice of appeal. First, the record includes an adequate factual basis for the minor’s admission of the grand theft charge in the third original petition where the parties stipulated that she stole a golf cart, with a value exceeding $400, from Capstone, Inc.

Regarding disposition, we conclude that the order removing the minor from her mother’s custody was reasonable, given the minor’s inability to conform to the conditions of probation and the fact her physical health and behavior improved during her detention in juvenile hall.

We have concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: King, J., Miller, J.


Summaries of

In re D.S.

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Second Division
Jan 30, 2009
No. E045993 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2009)
Case details for

In re D.S.

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jan 30, 2009

Citations

No. E045993 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 30, 2009)