In re Joseph C.
Filed 6/29/06 In re Joseph C. CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| In re JOSEPH C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSEPH C., Defendant and Appellant. | G036225 (Super. Ct. No. DL007848) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Irwin Pransky, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed.
Terrence V. Scott, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Scott C. Taylor, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
Joseph C., also known as Joey, appeals from an order of the juvenile court continuing him as a ward of the court and committing him to juvenile hall for 120 days based on the finding that he was guilty of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger in contravention of Penal Code section 12020, subdivision (a)(4).[1] He presents only one issue on appeal -- whether there was substantial evidence that he concealed a particular knife as he was walking down a street late at night.[2] Despite coming to us under the heading of insufficient evidence, the nature of his argument is essentially a legal one, focusing on the semantic test for concealment under California law.
Here is how his argument goes: The Penal Code makes â€
