Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. No. NJ22915, John C. Lawson III, Commissioner.
David L. Polsky, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
RUBIN, J.
A.W. appeals from the juvenile court’s judgment declaring him a ward of the court and confining him to community camp placement. Because he raises no arguable issues on appeal, we affirm.
On September 11, 2007, two juveniles and a third person, whose age is not in the record, approached victim Daniel Chavez. One of the juveniles, whom Chavez later identified as 16-year-old appellant, A.W., held what was later learned to be a toy gun against Chavez’s neck. A.W. and his companions moved Chavez to a dark alley, where they took $400 from his wallet. They then ran away. Chasing after his assailants, Chavez called 911 on his cell phone to report the robbery.
Within minutes, a Long Beach police officer in patrol in the area heard a police radio broadcast providing a description of the robbers. He saw A.W. and another male matching the robbers’ descriptions running down the street. He repeatedly ordered them to stop, but they disobeyed him. As he pursued them, he saw A.W. discard the toy gun. The officer eventually caught A.W., who told the officer, “I only put the gun in that Mexican’s face. The other dude’s the one that took the money.” In an in-field show-up immediately after appellant’s arrest, victim Chavez identified appellant as the gunman.
The People filed a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 against appellant charging him with second degree robbery of Chavez. Appellant moved to suppress Chavez’s in-field identification of him as one of the robbers. Appellant argued the in-field show-up was unduly suggestive, but after an evidentiary hearing on the motion the juvenile court found otherwise and denied the suppression motion.
The court adjudicated the petition. Appellant testified at the hearing that he and his companion stumbled upon the robbery of Chavez already underway by their acquaintance of two weeks, D.L., who was accosting Chavez at gunpoint. According to appellant, D.L. ordered him to search Chavez’s pockets, and appellant, out of fear, complied with D.L.’s order. After hearing all the evidence, the court sustained the petition against appellant.
Appellant asked the court to place him home on probation with house arrest, which would have permitted him to continue playing high school football and attending special education classes. The probation department instead recommended camp placement. The court ordered appellant’s confinement to “short term” camp community placement not to exceed five years. This appeal followed.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant. In April 2008, counsel filed a brief under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, concluding he could not find any colorable issues to argue on appeal. The clerk of this court sent a letter to appellant on June 3, 2008, telling him counsel had found no arguable issues on appeal. We informed appellant he had 30 days to file a brief or letter raising any issues he wanted us to consider. He has not filed any such letter or brief. We have reviewed the record and find no arguable issues for appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: COOPER, P. J., BIGELOW, J.