Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County No. JJD059450. Valeriano Saucedo, Judge.
Patricia A. Andreoni, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Hill, J. and Kane, J.
On March 16, 2005, Appellant J.L. used a marking pen to write two names on a toilet paper dispenser in the girls’ bathroom at Tulare Western High School in Tulare.
On April 27, 2005, J.L. was charged with vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)).
On January 5, 2006, the juvenile court placed J.L. on informal probation (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 654.2).
On April 12, 2006, the juvenile court terminated informal probation and issued an arrest warrant for J.L. after she failed to appear at a court hearing.
On August 16, 2007, J.L. was arrested on the outstanding warrant.
On August 29, 2007, the juvenile court reinstated J.L.’s informal probation.
From September 9, 2007, through September 11, 2007, J.L. stayed at the home of Denise Garcia. On September 12, 2007, Garcia discovered several pieces of jewelry and $120 missing. That day, when J.L. went to Garcia’s house, Garcia saw her wearing a pair of Garcia’s earrings.
On September 13, 2007, Garcia reported the theft to the police. An officer contacted J.L. During a search of her purse, the officer found several pieces of jewelry and a makeup kit that J.L. admitted belonged to Garcia. Garcia told the probation department that she did not recover the $120 and a wedding ring valued at $1,000.
On February 11, 2009, the juvenile court placed J.L. on probation.
On March 25, 2009, the juvenile court ordered J.L. to pay restitution of $1,120 to Garcia.
J.L.’s appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) J.L. has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.