Opinion
A157416
09-10-2019
In re J.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. J.S., 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Napa County Super. Ct. No. 201434525-03)
J.S., born in April 2000, appeals from the juvenile court's review hearing order placing him on probation with various conditions after he served two years in the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) for a robbery offense (Pen. Code, § 211). Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and requests that we conduct an independent review of the record. J.S. was informed of his right to file a supplemental brief and did not do so. Having independently reviewed the record, we conclude there are no issues that require further briefing and affirm the judgment.
All further, undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On February 23, 2015, a juvenile wardship petition was filed in Solano County alleging J.S. committed: (1) unlawful taking of a car (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a), count 1); (2) petty theft (§ 490.2, count 2); (3) vandalism (§ 594, subd. (b)(1), count 3); and (4) possession of ammunition by a minor (§ 29650, count 4).
The petition was based on two separate incidents. In one incident, J.S. stole a car key, which he used to steal his friend's father's car. In another incident, J.S. punched a truck driver and broke the glass door of a nearby business. After J.S. was placed in the back seat of a patrol car, an officer found an unexpended rifle bullet in the back seat area. The juvenile court sustained the petition as counts one and two and adjudged J.S. a ward of the court.
On May 20, 2015, a second juvenile wardship petition was filed alleging J.S. committed: (1) felony robbery (§ 211, count 1); (2) felony grand theft (§ 487, subd. (c), count 2); and (3) misdemeanor battery (§ 242, count 3). According to a probation report, J.S. demanded money from a 7-Eleven store clerk and stole $248 from the clerk. J.S. admitted counts two and three and the juvenile court continued him as a ward of the court and placed him on probation with various conditions.
Thereafter, the prosecution alleged J.S. violated his probation by failing to attend school and counseling appointments, failing to report to Vallejo Day Reporting Center, assaulting someone at his school, using marijuana, and failing to remain at home. J.S. admitted he failed to attend school and assaulted another student; all remaining allegations were dismissed.
On December 7, 2016, a third juvenile wardship petition was filed alleging J.S. committed: (1) pimping and pandering a minor under 16 years of age (§ 266h, subd. (b)(2), count 1); (2) pandering by procuring a minor under age 16 (§ 266i, subd. (b)(2), count 2); (3) trafficking a minor for a commercial sex act (§ 236.1, subd. (c)(1), count 3); (4) lewd act upon a child (§ 664/288, subd. (a), count 4); (5) robbery (§ 211, count 5); (6) carjacking (§ 215, subd. (a), count 6); and (7) false imprisonment by violence (§ 236, count 7).
According to a probation report, a Vallejo Police Department officer was dispatched to a motel and made contact with victim M.O., who had a bloody nose and a swollen face. M.O. reported he went to a motel room to meet with a prostitute and was greeted by not only the prostitute, but also by three others, including two males who suddenly began punching and kicking him. One of the males put an object to M.O.'s back, simulating a gun, then went through his pockets and took his iPhone. M.O. then heard a car start in front of the motel room and thought someone was taking his car. M.O. was eventually able to run out of the room and call security, but by then, his keys, car, wallet, and iPhone were gone. Officers obtained a lead that a man named Jordan Weatherspoon had rented the motel room in which the attack occurred.
Several days later, officers found prostitution ads online that were associated with a missing 13-year-old girl's cell phone number. An officer "pos[ed] as a 'John' " and called the number and made arrangements to meet with the girl. The girl showed up at the meeting place and told the officer that two men—later identified as J.S. and Jordan Weatherspoon—had dropped her off at the meeting place. Police found J.S. and Weatherspoon in a car nearby. After being advised of his Miranda rights (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 437), J.S. admitted he financially benefits from the girl's prostitution and took her to the meeting place that night. Officers showed M.O. multiple photo lineups. M.O. identified the 13-year-old girl as the prostitute in the motel room and identified J.S. as the male who put an object to his back and went through his pockets and took his iPhone.
J.S. admitted the robbery charge and the remaining charges were dismissed. The juvenile court ordered that J.S. be committed to DJJ for two years. On April 10, 2019, the probation department reported that J.S. had served his two years at DJJ and had been ordered returned to the community. J.S. stated he planned to live with his grandmother in American Canyon, California, upon his release.
On April 24, 2019, the case was transferred to Napa County, and the Napa County Superior Court held a dispositional hearing the same day. The court placed J.S. on probation with various terms and conditions, adopted from the probation report that was filed in Solano County. Trial counsel objected to a number of the probation conditions, including conditions requiring J.S. to complete an alcohol and drug counseling and assessment program, an anger management counseling program, and a mental health assessment as directed by the probation officer. Counsel also argued that the condition requiring J.S. to consent to the search of his electronic devices was not reasonably related to his offense or rehabilitation.
The juvenile court imposed the electronic search condition, stating J.S. had used a cell phone in connection with the pimping and pandering offense. The court made minor modifications to two conditions, struck two other conditions, and imposed an additional condition requiring J.S. to stay 25 yards away from any school in which he is not enrolled, unless permitted by probation.
DISCUSSION
Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and asks this court to independently review the entire record to determine if it contains any issues which would, if resolved favorably to minor, result in reversal or modification. We have examined the entire record and have found no reasonably arguable appellate issue, and we are satisfied that counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Petrou, J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
Siggins, P. J. /s/_________
Fujisaki, J.