In re Matthew H.

Full title: THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MATTHEW H., Defendant and…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Nov 1, 2007

No. F052843 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 1, 2007)

Opinion

In re MATTHEW H., a Person Coming Under The Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MATTHEW H., Defendant and Appellant. F052843 California Court of Appeal, Fifth District November 1, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, Super. Ct. No. 03CEJ6000070-7. Denise Whitehead, Judge.

Adam Grace, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

OPINION

THE COURT ^*

* Before Harris, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.

It was alleged in two separate juvenile wardship petitions (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602), filed February 21, 2007, and March 6, 2007,¹ respectively, that appellant Matthew H., a minor, committed individual counts of misdemeanor and felony vandalism (Pen. Code, § 594, subds. (a), (b)(1)), and possession of alcoholic beverages by a minor (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 25662, subd. (a)), and two counts of giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9). On March 9, appellant admitted two counts of misdemeanor vandalism. On March 23, the juvenile court read judged appellant a ward of the court² and ordered him committed to the Elkhorn Correctional Facility Delta Program for a period not to exceed 365 days.

1 All references to dates of events are to dates in 2007.

2 Appellant was initially adjudged a ward of the court in 2003, following his adjudication of two misdemeanors: petty theft by conversion of real property to personal property by severance (§ 487c) and vandalism.

Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant has not responded to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing.

FACTS ³

3 Our factual summary is taken from the report of the probation officer.

According to a City of Fresno Police Department report, at 1:48 a.m. on February 19, police officers responded to an apartment complex and made contact with the complex security officer who told the officers he saw appellant and another person “writing on a parked vehicle with marking pens.”

A Fresno County Juvenile Institutions incident report dated February 28, 2007, stated that while officers at the Juvenile Justice Campus were conducting room searches, they found “tagging” on the door and window in appellant’s room. Appellant admitted defacing the room.

DISCUSSION

Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.