Opinion
B294486
07-24-2019
In re FRANK P., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANK P., Defendant and Appellant.
Gerald Peters, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VJ46019) APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Fumiko H. Wasserman, Judge. Affirmed. Gerald Peters, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On a Sunday afternoon, Los Angeles School Police Department officers detained Frank P., then a 15 year old, and three juvenile companions, who had fled after the officers found them inside two elementary school classrooms in the City of South Gate. The officers discovered the classrooms had been ransacked. Chairs and desks were overturned and broken. Light fixtures were damaged. The floors, walls and ceilings were smeared with paint. The rooms were littered with glue, glitter, yarn and paper.
Photographs of the vandalized classrooms were introduced into evidence.
Before being interviewed by the officers, Frank waived his rights to remain silent, to have an attorney present and, if indigent, to appointed counsel. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694].) Frank told the officers he had entered the classrooms with the other juveniles and admitted he had "throw[n] paint and stuff around." The total amount of damages was $21,966.37.
The People filed a petition pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging Frank had committed second degree burglary and felony vandalism. Following a jurisdiction hearing, the juvenile court sustained the petition. It also declared the offenses felonies and Frank a ward of the court. At the disposition hearing, the court ordered Frank home on probation. The court also ordered either victim restitution or community service as requested by the school as a condition of probation. Frank filed a timely notice of appeal.
R.R., one of Frank's companions was also found to have committed the same offenses and is pursuing a separate appeal. --------
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent Frank on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On March 5, 2019, we gave Frank notice he had 30 days to submit a brief or letter raising any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments he wanted us to consider. We have not received a response.
We have examined the record and are satisfied that appellate counsel for Frank has complied with his responsibilities and that there are not arguable issues. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442.)
DISPOSITION
The orders are affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
CURREY, J. WE CONCUR:
WILLHITE, Acting P.J.
COLLINS, J.