Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J95-02749
McGuiness, P.J.
C.H. (appellant), born in 1990, appeals from a dispositional order placing him at the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility (OAYRF). Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and requests that we conduct an independent review of the record. Appellant was informed of his right to file a supplemental brief and did not file such a brief. Having independently reviewed the record, we conclude there are no issues that require further briefing, and affirm the order.
Factual and Procedural Background
On February 29, 2008, a supplemental wardship petition was filed alleging appellant (1) committed battery on a school employee (Pen. Code, §§ 242, 243.6, count 1) and (2) gave false information to a peace officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a), count 2). According to a probation report, a police officer responded to a high school on a report that a staff member had been assaulted. The officer met with the vice principal of the school, who was the victim in the case. The victim said that, while clearing out the gym after a basketball game, he saw appellant and his cousin. Appellant’s cousin had previously been suspended from the school and was not supposed to be there. The victim also knew appellant was not a student at the school. When the victim asked appellant and his cousin to leave, they refused to do so despite repeated requests. Appellant became upset, asked the victim why he was being picked on, threw a cup of Gatorade in the victim’s face, and left. A police officer located appellant and his cousin later that day. Appellant gave a false name to the police officer.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
At the time of the offense, appellant had a prior juvenile court history, including an original petition dated March 30, 2006, alleging petty theft (§ 488), and a supplemental petition dated May 18, 2006, adding charges of second degree robbery (§§ 664, 211) and false imprisonment (§ 236). On June 9, 2006, appellant admitted the charge of attempted second degree robbery and the other two charges were dismissed reserving restitution. At disposition, appellant was committed to OAYRF for nine months. On June 20, 2007, and again on February 27, 2008, appellant admitted violating his probation by failing to attend school and testing positive for marijuana. The current petition was filed pending disposition on the probation violation admissions.
On August 22, 2008, appellant admitted count 1 of the current petition (battery on a school employee), and the trial court dismissed count 2 on the prosecutor’s motion. At the disposition hearing on September 5, 2008, appellant’s attorney argued that appellant should do his custody time in the county jail so that he could complete the “Deuce program” and work on his school credits. Appellant also asked to be placed in county jail. However, the juvenile court followed the recommendations of the probation department and ordered him placed at OAYRF for no more than 180 days with an additional 90 day conditional release/parole period. The juvenile court stated it had “strongly consider[ed]” appellant’s request to be placed in county jail but believed it would not be in his best interests because OAYRF provided a more comprehensive program that would address all of his needs, including anger management issues.
Discussion
The record shows appellant’s admission was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily made and that there was a factual basis for the admission. The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in placing appellant at OAYRF in light of the services the facility would provide to appellant. Appellant was adequately represented by counsel at every stage of the proceedings and appeared at every hearing. He has been competently represented by counsel in this appeal. We have reviewed the “entire record in this case and have found no arguable issues therein.” (See People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 443.)
Disposition
The dispositional order is affirmed.
We concur: Pollak, J., Siggins, J.