In re C.X.
Filed 6/21/07 In re C.X. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re C.X., a Person Coming Under The Juvenile Court Law. | |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. C.X., Defendant and Appellant. | F051912 (Super. Ct. No. 06C3J601134-1) O P I N I O N |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Martin Suits, Commissioner.
Kristine Cobery, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
On August 28, 2006, at approximately 11:48 a.m. Fresno County sheriffs deputies responding to a report of a burglary in progress found that someone had entered the victims house by breaking a window and opening the backdoor. The deputies also found that two of the bedrooms had been ransacked and various items were missing including $9,600 in cash and $3,000 in jewelry.
On September 14, 2006, appellant, 16-year-old C.X., was interviewed regarding the burglary and admitted that he and three other juveniles broke into the house.
On September 16, 2006, the district attorney filed a petition charging C. with one count of residential burglary.
On September 18, 2006, the district attorney found that C. was eligible for deferred entry of judgment (DEJ).
On October 16, 2006, C. admitted the burglary offense after being promised that he was eligible and would be considered for DEJ but if found unsuitable, he would be allowed to withdraw his plea.
On October 30, 2006, the probation department filed a DEJ Report concluding that C. was unsuitable for DEJ because his family was relocating to another state and that in any case, he was a marginal candidate for DEJ. Also, at a hearing on that date, the court allowed C. to withdraw his plea.
On November 8, 2006, C. again admitted the burglary offense.
On November 28, 2006, the court set C.s maximum term of confinement at six years and committed him to the Elkhorn Correctional Facility for a period not to exceed 365 days and, alternatively, to the Juvenile Justice Center for 180 days if C. failed to pass the mandatory physical and psychological screenings.
C.s appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) C. has not responded to this courts invitation to submit additional briefing.
Following independent review of the record we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.
*Before Levy, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Dawson, J.
