In re A.M.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 11/14/13  In re A.M. CA2/6

 

 

 

 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.

 

 

IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

 

SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT

 

DIVISION SIX

 

 
>

THE PEOPLE,       Plaintiff and Respondent,   v.   A.M.,       Defendant and Appellant.

2d Crim. No. B249313 (Super. Ct. No. 2013004445) (Ventura County)

 

                        A.M., a minor, appeals
the juvenile court order declaring him a ward of the court pursuant to Welfare
and Institutions Code section 602.  The
juvenile court sustained a wardship petition after finding true allegations
that appellant had committed two second
degree robberies (Pen. Code, § 211). 
Appellant subsequently admitted the allegation that he had resisted,
obstructed, or delayed a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)).  Appellant was ordered to serve 210 days in
the Juvenile Facility, with credit for 75 days. 
The court also stated that appellant had the possibility of earning an
early release for one-third of his commitment.  

                        On January 24, 2013, two males wearing bandanas over
their faces robbed a pizza restaurant.  One of the perpetrators had a gun.  That same date, two males dressed in black
and armed with guns robbed a market in the same vicinity.

                        Several days later, a
police officer viewed surveillance videos of the robberies and recognized
appellant as one of the perpetrators. 
The officer had known appellant for eight years and lived next door to
his father.  When the officer saw
appellant at his school on the day of the robberies, he was wearing the clothes
he wore when he committed the crimes.  When a search warrant was subsequently
executed at appellant's residence, the police found a sweater with a
distinctive emblem on the hood in his bedroom. 
The same sweater was worn by one of the robbers, as depicted in the
surveillance videos.  A box of ammunition
was also found inside appellant's mattress. 


                        We appointed href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">counsel to represent appellant in this
appeal.  After examining the record,
counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that we
independently examine the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436.

                        On September 9, 2013, we advised appellant in writing
that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">contentions or issues he wished to raise
on appeal.  Appellant did not respond.

                        Having examined the
entire record, we are satisfied that appointed counsel has fully complied with
her responsibilities and that no arguable
issues exist.  (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123–124; >People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p.
441.)

                        The judgment is
affirmed.

                        NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

 

 

 

 

                                                                        PERREN,
J.

 

We concur:

 

 

                        GILBERT, P.J.

 

 

 

                        YEGAN, J.



 

David
R. Worley, Judge

 

Superior
Court County
of Ventura

 

______________________________

 

 

                        Arielle Bases, under
appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

                        No appearance for
Plaintiff and Respondent.