Opinion
A145185
11-20-2015
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. W.B., 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Alameda County Super. Ct. No. SJ1402401201)
In 2014, the People filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 wardship petition alleging appellant W.B. (the minor) committed two misdemeanors: methamphetamine possession (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and concentrated cannabis possession (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (a)). The minor admitted marijuana possession (Health & Saf. Code, § 11357, subd. (c)); the juvenile court found the minor came within section 602 and placed him on probation without wardship (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 725, subd. (a)). Over the minor's objection, the court imposed a probation condition requiring the minor to submit to a warrantless search of his electronic devices, including passwords. The court denied the minor's motion to modify the electronic search condition. The minor appealed and we appointed counsel to represent him. After the minor appealed, the court terminated and dismissed the minor's probation.
On our own motion, we take judicial notice of the reporter's transcript of the August 4, 2014 hearing where the court terminated and dismissed the minor's probation. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (d), 459.)
The minor's appointed counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and informed the minor he had the right to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. The minor declined to do so. We have reviewed the entire record pursuant to Wende and find no arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106.) The court made the required findings when the minor entered his plea. (In re Matthew N. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1412, 1420; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.778(e), (f).) The termination and dismissal of the minor's probation moots any challenge to the electronic search condition. (In re Erica R. (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 907, 922 [minor's challenge to electronic search condition was moot where she was "no longer subject to the search condition"]; In re Charles G. (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 608, 611 [termination of probation mooted the minor's complaints about probation conditions].) The minor has been adequately represented by counsel at every stage of the proceedings.
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/_________
Jones, P.J.
We concur: /s/_________
Simons, J.
/s/_________
Bruiniers, J.