Opinion
2d Juv. No. B277031
01-24-2017
In re A.V., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A.V., Defendant and Appellant.
Bruce G. Finebaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. KJ39881)
(Los Angeles County)
A.V. appeals a judgment entered after the juvenile court sustained one count of a petition alleging that he possessed a controlled substance (methamphetamine) with a firearm. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a); Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a).) The court declared A.V. to be a ward of the court, placed him on home probation with terms and conditions, and ordered him to pay a $100 restitution fine.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 25, 2016, the prosecutor filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition alleging that A.V. possessed methamphetamine with a firearm (count 1), and possessed a firearm as a minor (count 2). (Health and Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a); Pen. Code, § 29610.) A.V. filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained during his detention, search, and arrest. Following an evidentiary hearing and argument by the parties, the juvenile court denied the suppression motion.
A.V. then waived his constitutional rights and admitted that he possessed methamphetamine with a firearm (count 1). The court determined that count 1 was a felony, dismissed count 2, and declared A.V. a ward of the court within Welfare and Institutions Code section 602.
We appointed counsel to represent A.V. in this appeal. After counsel's examination of the record, he filed an opening brief raising no issues.
On December 16, 2016, we advised A.V. that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that A.V.'s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441; In re Kevin S. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 97, 119 [prophylactic rules of Wende apply to delinquency appeals].)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
GILBERT, P. J. We concur: PERREN, J. TANGEMAN, J. Geanene Garcia-Yrarte, Judge
Superior Court County of Los Angeles
Bruce G. Finebaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Defendant and Appellant.