From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re D.C.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR
Feb 29, 2012
A133100 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)

Opinion

A133100

02-29-2012

In re D.C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D. C., Defendant and Appellant.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J11-01043)

D. C. appeals from an order declaring him a ward of the juvenile court and committing him to placement at the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility for a nine-month program. His counsel raises no issues and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was apprised of his right to file a supplemental brief but did not do so.

On July 14, 2011, a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition was filed alleging that defendant, a minor, was in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12101, subd. (a)) and that he violated Penal Code section 12031, subdivision (a)(2)(F) by possessing a non-registered loaded firearm and ammunition. The charges stemmed from an incident in which defendant was detained following a vehicle code violation and found to be in possession of the loaded firearm.

On July, 25, 2011, defendant moved to suppress evidence on the ground that the seizure of the firearm was made without a search warrant. The trial court properly denied the motion, finding that the officer was justified in detaining and searching the defendant.

The evidence at the contested jurisdictional hearing revealed that Officer Coniglio was on routine patrol driving along 2nd Street in Richmond at approximately 5:33 p.m. on July 12, 2011, when he saw a group of males standing in the northbound lanes. As he approached, defendant stepped out into the intersection in front of Coniglio's vehicle, causing Coniglio to aggressively apply the brakes of the car and swerve in order not to hit defendant. Coniglio pulled over, intending to cite defendant for violating Vehicle Code section 21950, subdivision (b). He exited the vehicle, and defendant fled and attempted to jump a wooden residential fence. Coniglio was able to detain defendant. Defendant struggled as Coniglio attempted to place handcuffs on him. Coniglio had to place a hand on defendant's mid-section in order to handcuff him and in the process felt a solid, hard object in defendant's front waistband area. Coniglio believed that the object he felt was consistent with a firearm. When Coniglio was able to detain defendant, he searched him for officer safety reasons, and found a loaded firearm containing five live rounds. After waiving his Miranda rights, defendant told Coniglio that he found the firearm approximately fifteen minutes earlier and planned to sell it.

The juvenile court sustained the petition finding that the People had met their burden beyond a reasonable doubt as to both allegations.

At the dispositional hearing, the court, having read and considered the probation report, committed defendant to the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility for a nine-month regular program.

Defendant was represented by counsel and received a fair hearing. Substantial evidence supports the court's findings. There was no error in the disposition. There are no meritorious issues to be argued.

The dispositional order is affirmed.

RIVERA, J. We concur: REARDON, ACTING P. J. SEPULVEDA, J.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.


Summaries of

In re D.C.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR
Feb 29, 2012
A133100 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)
Case details for

In re D.C.

Case Details

Full title:In re D.C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR

Date published: Feb 29, 2012

Citations

A133100 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2012)