Filed 9/12/17 In re R.N. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
| In re R.N., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
| 2d Juv. No. B281249 (Super. Ct. No. MJ23191) (Los Angeles County) |
|
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
R.N.,
Defendant and Appellant.
|
|
R.N., a minor, appeals from the juvenile court’s February 9, 2017 disposition order after appellant admitted violating probation. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 777.)[1] Appellant was on probation for theft related offenses and violated probation when he was suspended from school for gang-related activity. The juvenile court terminated home on probation, found that appellant was a person described by section 602, and placed appellant in the care, custody, and control of the probation department for suitable placement. The court determined that the maximum confinement time was one year and awarded 215 days custody credit.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised.
On July 25, 2017, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443; In re Kevin S. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 97, 118-119.)
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
YEGAN, J.
We concur:
GILBERT, P. J.
TANGEMAN, J.
Denise McLaughlin-Bennett, Judge
Superior Court County of Los Angeles
______________________________
Law Offices of Esther R. Sorkin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Respondent.
[1] All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
