From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re D.M.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Jan 10, 2012
E053675 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2012)

Opinion

E053675 Super.Ct.No. J231322

01-10-2012

In re D.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D.M., 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. William Jefferson Powell IV, Judge. Affirmed.

David R. Greifinger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

A juvenile wardship petition was filed alleging that defendant and appellant D.M. committed first degree residential burglary. (Pen. Code, § 459.) The juvenile court found the allegation to be true and that defendant came within the meaning of Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. Defendant was on probation for a previous burglary at the time of the current offense, so the court ordered that he be continued a ward of the court and that he be detained in juvenile hall for 158 days, with credit for 46 days served. The court further ordered that defendant be released to himself on his 18th birthday, which was on July 22, 2011.

Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The victim lived in a gated community. Her address was 785 West Manzanita Street. On February 15, 2011, she left her home about 7:20 a.m. When she returned home at noon, her house was a mess, and there was glass everywhere. A window at the rear of the house had been broken. At the bottom of the staircase, she saw a number of her belongings in a pile, including two big screen televisions, laptops, cameras, and a bag with alcohol. She went upstairs and saw that her room had been "turned upside down." She noticed several items missing, including pieces of jewelry.

Robert Anderson lived in the same neighborhood as the victim. That same day, he observed two males drive into the neighborhood and park a car at 813 West Manzanita Street. He saw them get out of the car and, a few minutes later, he saw them looking down the street "like they were checking something out." Anderson got into his car and drove outside of the community gate. As he looked in his rear-view mirror, he observed one of the males jump over a wall from the backyard of one of the houses onto the sidewalk; he observed the other male on his cell phone. Anderson called 911.

Officers Cindy Sandona and Jacqueline Haynie responded to the call. While Anderson was telling Officer Sandona what he had observed, Officer Sandona saw a male jumping over the wall. Anderson confirmed that he was one of the two males he had previously seen. Officer Sandona confronted the male, identified as defendant, who said he was visiting his cousin's house and waiting for his cousin to return.

As Officer Sandona was talking to defendant, she and Officer Haynie saw a second male jump over the wall and flee. That individual was later identified as Cory Harris. Officer Haynie started to pursue Harris, and defendant ran off in a different direction. Officer Sandona let defendant go in order to assist Officer Haynie. Officer Haynie located Harris, arrested him, and searched him. She found two silver rings in Harris's pocket, which were later identified as belonging to the victim. She also found a pair of gloves on his person, and another pair of gloves in the bushes behind the victim's residence.

Officer Sandona eventually found defendant hiding in a backyard. She searched him and found a cell phone and keys. She confirmed that he was the individual she had observed jumping out of the victim's backyard. Officer Sandona gave Officer Haynie the keys that had been found on defendant's person. One of the keys fit into Harris's car.

Defendant testified that he and Harris went to his cousin's house at 813 West Manzanita Street that day. His cousin was not home. As defendant was on his phone trying to reach his cousin, Harris said, "Hold my keys, I'll be back." Defendant next saw Harris returning from down the street. Harris said he was going to break into a house. Defendant tried to talk Harris out of it, but Harris started walking away again. Defendant followed him, and tried to convince him not to do anything. Defendant then turned back to his cousin's house, when he heard a crash, like glass breaking. Defendant last saw Harris going to the victim's backyard, so he went back in that direction, climbed up a tree, looked over the wall, and saw the broken glass. He hopped over the wall into the backyard and called Harris's name. When he did not hear a response, he hopped back over the wall, and then saw the police. They started questioning him until they saw Harris jumping over the wall. Defendant said he ran when the officers were looking in Harris's direction because he was scared. He was already on probation and did not want to get charged with another residential burglary. Defendant said he was not involved with this incident.

ANALYSIS

Defendant appealed and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, but no potential arguable issues. Counsel has also requested this court to undertake a review of the entire record.

We offered defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

HOLLENHORST

Acting P. J.
We concur:

KING

J.

MILLER

J.


Summaries of

In re D.M.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Jan 10, 2012
E053675 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2012)
Case details for

In re D.M.

Case Details

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

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

Date published: Jan 10, 2012

Citations

E053675 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2012)