In re Giovanny S.
Filed 8/8/07 In re Giovanny S. CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
In re GIOVANNY S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B194954 (Super. Ct. No. FJ38459) |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GIOVANNY S., Defendant and Appellant. |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Cynthia L. Loo, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, 21.) Affirmed.
Ann Krausz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________________
A three-count petition alleged that 15-year-old Giovanny S. shot at an inhabited dwelling, shot at an unoccupied vehicle, discharged a firearm with gross negligence, and (as to all counts) personally used a firearm. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602; Pen. Code, 246, 247, subd. (b), 246.3, 12022.5, subd. (a).) Following an adjudication hearing at which one witness testified that she saw Giovanny firing shots at a certain intersection at 2 p.m. one day, then get into a white Honda Civic (registered to a person living at Giovannys residence), and another witness testified that at 5:30 p.m. the same day and near the same intersection, she heard shots and saw Giovanny with a gun in his hand getting into the same car. The juvenile court sustained the allegation that Giovanny had discharged a firearm with gross negligence (a felony), and found true the allegation that he personally used a firearm. Giovanny was declared a ward of the court and ordered into a six-month camp program with the period of confinement not to exceed 13 years.
Giovanny filed a notice of appeal and we appointed counsel to represent him. After reviewing the record, appellate counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On June 11, 2007, we notified Giovanny that he had 30 days within which to submit any issues he wanted us to consider. Giovanny has not responded. Based on our independent examination of the record, we are satisfied that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
VOGEL, J.
We concur:
MALLANO, Acting P.J.
ROTHSCHILD, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney directory.
Analysis and review provided by Oceanside Property line attorney.
