Opinion
F079917
02-13-2020
In re J.L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. J.L., Defendant and Appellant.
Kristen Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 15CEJ600319-1V3)
OPINION
THE COURT APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Kimberly J. Nystrom-Geist, Judge. Kristen Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Poochigian, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J. --------
-ooOoo-
Appointed counsel for former minor and appellant J.L. asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant was advised of her right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed and we received no communication from appellant. We find no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to appellant. Thus, we affirm.
BACKGROUND
On October 28, 2015, the juvenile court placed appellant on probation after having found she committed misdemeanor shoplifting (Pen. Code, § 459.5, subd. (a)). Her probation was due to terminate on March 8, 2018.
On January 30, 2018, when appellant was 18 years old, the probation department filed a supplemental petition for modification (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 777), alleging appellant violated probation because she failed to report to probation on three dates and failed to report her change of address. Her whereabouts had been unknown since December 5, 2017. Probation requested that a bench warrant be issued.
On August 12, 2019, appellant admitted violating probation.
In preparation for the disposition hearing, the probation officer recommended 30 days in county jail based on appellant's age (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 208.5), as a consequence of all the time appellant had not been under probation supervision. The officer recommended that her probation terminate upon her release from custody.
At the disposition hearing on September 3, 2019, defense counsel requested that probation be terminated. The juvenile court, however, found the probation officer's recommendation appropriate and well reasoned, with a rehabilitative purpose. The court ordered that appellant remain a ward of the court and committed her to the Juvenile Justice Campus for 30 days, to be served in county jail. The court ordered that she continue on probation until October 2, 2019, or upon her release from custody, whichever occurred first.
On September 3, 2019, appellant filed a notice of appeal.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no evidence of ineffective assistance of counsel or any other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to appellant.
DISPOSITION
The juvenile court's findings and orders are affirmed.