In re Joseph C.
Filed 11/1/13 In re Joseph C. CA4/1
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
COURT
OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
ONE
STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
In re JOSEPH C., a Person
Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
JOSEPH C.,
Defendant and Appellant.
D063870
(Super. Ct.
No. J222099)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of
County, Richard R. Monroy, Judge. Affirmed.
Kleven
McGann Law and Sarah Kleven McGann, under appointment by the Court of Appeal,
for Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Following
an adjudication hearing, the juvenile court found that Joseph C. (the Minor)
had committed the felony offense of possessing a concealed dirk or dagger (Pen.
Code, § 21310), two misdemeanor offenses of violating curfew (San Diego
Mun. Code, § 58.0102, subd. (A)) and one infraction for loitering (San
Diego Mun. Code, § 58.05, subd. (b)(1)).
At the
disposition hearing the court determined the maximum custody was three
years. The court took custody of the
Minor under Welfare and Institutions Code 726, subdivision (a), and imposed,
but stayed a commitment to the Short Term Offender Program.
the court set the dagger offense as a felony, subject to a defense motion to
reduce it to a misdemeanor. No such
motion is in this record.
The Minor
filed a timely notice of appeal.
Counsel has filed a brief
pursuant to
Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and
(Anders) raising possible, but not
arguable issues. We offered the Minor
the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.
STATEMENT
OF FACTS
1. Loitering Infraction. At the adjudication hearing, the Minor
admitted that on December 14, 2012,
he was at a park when he should have been in school.
2. Curfew Violations. On December
21, 2012, the Minor was cited for being out after 11:00 p.m., without legitimate reason.
On January 19, 2013, the Minor was again
cited for being out at 10:30 p.m.,
without legitimate reason.
3. Carrying a Concealed Knife. The Minor was contacted by police while he
was sitting on a bench at a public park.
During questioning the Minor said he had a weapon on him; that he had a
knife in his pocket. Police patted down
the Minor and discovered a knife in a sheath in the Minor's pocket. Police examined the knife and discovered it
was a two-sided blade, and thus was a dagger.
The Minor was then arrested.
DISCUSSION
As we have
noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief indicating she is unable to identify
any argument for reversal and asks this court to review the record for error as
mandated by Wende, supra, 25
Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to
identifies the possible, but not arguable issues:
1. Did the juvenile court fail to exercise its
discretion to consider whether the knife offense should have been a
misdemeanor?
2. Does Penal Code section 21310 violate the
Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
3. Was the pat down of the Minor unlawful?
We have
reviewed the entire record in accordance with Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders, supra, 386 U.S. 738, and have not found any reasonably
arguable appellate issues. Competent
counsel has represented the Minor on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.
WE CONCUR:
McDONALD,
J.
AARON,
J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] The court's decision to stay the commitment to the Short
Term Offender Program was based on information that the Minor would be moving
to Oklahoma with his aunt.
