Opinion
B231153
08-10-2011
In re T.F., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. T.F., Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. YJ35170)
BOREN, P. J., DOI TODD, J., ASHMANN-GERST, J.
T.F., a minor, appeals from the order declaring him a ward of the court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 by reason of his having committed the crimes of possession of live ammunition by a minor (Pen. Code, § 12101, subd. (b)(1)) and carrying a loaded firearm in a public place (§ 12031, subds. (a)(1) & (2)(D)). The trial court declared the offenses to be misdemeanors and placed appellant home on probation. This matter arose from the following facts.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
At 1:30 a.m. on October 2, 2010, Officer Roberto Reyes was on patrol with his partner. He noticed a large group of males drinking in public in front of a building located near 11121 Freeman Avenue, in Lennox, in the County of Los Angeles. His partner put the spotlight on to illuminate the area. Officer Reyes saw "[appellant] throw a black T-shirt over an object that [appellant] was standing next to."
Officer Reyes and his partner exited their vehicle. They called backup because there were approximately 15 males in the group. After additional units arrived and everyone was detained for drinking in public, Officer Reyes walked over to where the object was thrown. He found a shotgun painted in camouflage. The shotgun was loaded and appeared to be in working condition.
At the close of the evidence, appellant moved to dismiss the charges based upon the insufficiency of the evidence. The trial court denied the motion.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an "Opening Brief" in which no issues were raised.
On May 27, 2011, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
The order appealed from is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.