Opinion
H046317
02-04-2020
In re E.V., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. E.V., 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. JV41762)
Several juvenile wardship petitions were filed over the course of almost two years, alleging minor E.V. had committed a series of crimes including car thefts, burglaries, and a robbery. Upon minor's timely appeal of a dispositional order committing him to the Santa Clara County Juvenile Rehabilitation Facilities - Enhanced Ranch Program, we appointed counsel to represent him in this court. Appellate counsel filed a brief stating the case and facts but raising no issues. We notified minor of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf. Minor did not file written argument.
We have reviewed the entire record to determine if there are any arguable appellate issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 440-441.) We include here a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case as well as the jurisdiction and disposition findings. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123-124.) Finding no arguable issue, we will affirm the judgment.
I. JUVENILE COURT PROCEEDINGS
Nine juvenile wardship petitions were filed between April 2016 and August 2018 (Petitions A through I). As the disposition order minor challenges involves only the last four of those petitions, and two of those remaining petitions were admitted without a contested hearing, we limit our factual discussion to the two contested petitions (Petitions F and G).
A man testified at the Petition F jurisdiction hearing that he was driving for Lyft, Inc. one night in San Francisco and decided to take a break at Baker Beach. He saw a bonfire and approached it to warm up before going back to work. A group of people were by the fire (the man identified minor at the hearing as a member of the group). The people in the group immediately started asking the man questions about why he was there. Minor asked the most questions. Someone struck the man in the back of the head with a blunt object and tackled him to the ground. The man managed to push the first assailant away, but then another person in the group pinned him down and the others punched and kicked him. Someone in the group took the man's jacket, which contained his smartphone and credit cards. The group eventually left the man on the beach. Petition F was filed in San Francisco Superior Court alleging one count of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and one count of assault by force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)). The juvenile court found the allegations true after a contested jurisdiction hearing, and transferred the matter to Santa Clara County for disposition.
A woman testified at the Petition G jurisdiction hearing that she returned to her home in Santa Clara one evening and noticed a sliding glass door was open. The house had been ransacked. A window in the woman's bedroom was also open and the screen broken. The window had been closed when she left for work that morning. A fingerprint taken from the bedroom window (or window sill) matched minor's fingerprint. An Xbox, an iPad, a GoPro, a DSLR camera, jewelry, and over $1,000 in cash was missing. Petition G alleged one count of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 460, subd. (a)), and the allegation was found true after a contested jurisdiction hearing.
Petition H alleged one count of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 460, subd. (a)), which minor admitted after waiving a jurisdiction hearing. Petition I alleged five counts of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 460, subd. (a)). Minor admitted two of the burglary counts in Petition I in return for dismissal of the remaining counts with a Harvey waiver. (People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.)
At a combined disposition hearing for Petitions F through I in September 2018, the juvenile court continued minor as a ward of the court and committed him to the Santa Clara County Juvenile Rehabilitation Facilities - Enhanced Ranch Program for six to eight months (minor was advised his maximum possible commitment time was 16 years 10 months). Minor was ordered to pay a $110 restitution fine (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.6, subd. (b)(1)) and a $158 general fund fine (which included penalty assessments) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730.5). Minor received 261 days of presentence credit.
We have reviewed the entire record and find no arguable issue.
II. DISPOSITION
The disposition order is affirmed.
/s/_________
Grover, J.
WE CONCUR:
/s/_________
Elia, Acting P. J. /s/_________
Danner, J.