Opinion
G053390
03-09-2018
In re DYLAN S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DYLAN S., Defendant and Appellant.
Kendall Dawson Wasley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. DL038829-010) OPINION Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Lewis W. Klapp, Judge. Affirmed. Kendall Dawson Wasley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
INTRODUCTION
The juvenile court found Dylan S. violated the terms and conditions of his probation by testing positive for illicit substances and by failing to attend counseling, report to probation, and submit to drug testing as ordered by the court. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), setting forth the facts of the case and requesting we review the entire record. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), appointed counsel identified potential issues to assist us in our independent review. We provided Dylan 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf; he did not do so.
We have examined the entire record and appointed counsel's Wende/Anders brief and have found no reasonably arguable issue. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) We therefore affirm.
BACKGROUND
In January 2013, a juvenile delinquency petition "subsequent" was filed in the Orange County Juvenile Court alleging Dylan came within Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 because he committed the offense of receiving stolen property in violation of Penal Code section 496, subdivision (a). After Dylan admitted the allegations of the petition, the court found those allegations true and ordered that Dylan continue as a ward of the juvenile court. The court ordered Dylan to follow the terms and conditions of probation.
This petition was the 10th juvenile delinquency petition filed against Dylan. --------
The Orange County Probation Department filed a notice of hearing on juvenile probation violation alleging Dylan violated the terms of probation by testing positive for THC, amphetamine, and methamphetamine; failing to attend counseling as directed by the probation officer; failing to report to the probation officer; and failing to submit to drug testing. The juvenile court found the allegations contained in the notice of hearing on juvenile probation violation true and found Dylan in violation of the terms of his probation.
The court ordered that Dylan continue as a ward of the juvenile court, ordered him to be committed to the juvenile hall or appropriate facility for 63 days, and further ordered that he continue on probation with terms and conditions. Dylan appealed.
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the record in accordance with our obligations under Wende and Anders, and we find no reasonably arguable issues on appeal. Dylan himself has not raised any issues for our review. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 120, 124.)
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
FYBEL, J. WE CONCUR: O'LEARY, P. J. IKOLA, J.