In re F.Z.
Filed 7/26/07 In re F.Z. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 F. Z., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B194862 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. JJ13637) |
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. F. Z., Defendant and Appellant. |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Robert Ambrose, Judge. Affirmed.
Bruce G. Finebaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_____________________________________
We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this matter. After examining the record counsel filed a Wende brief raising no issues on appeal and requesting that we independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellants attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (Id. at p. 441.) We set out below a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, the punishment imposed, defendants contention of appeal and why it fails. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110.)
The trial court sustained a petition charging appellant, a minor, with a violation of Penal Code section 626.10, subdivision (a) (possessing a weapon on school grounds)[1] and ordered appellant be placed home on probation with camp surrender and declared the maximum period of confinement was 4 years and 4 months. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.
On June 4, 2007 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. In his notice of appeal, however, appellant stated he wished to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the sustaining of the petition.
Appellant was found on the campus of Huntington Park High School in possession of an Allen wrench which had been filed so that it had blade-like edges and came to a tip at one end. Appellant did not challenge the search which produced the wrench.
The trial court examined a photograph of the wrench and heard testimony from the school principal and a school safety officer describing it. The court found the wrench was a dirk or dagger as those terms are defined in Penal Code section 626.10.[2] We find no basis for overturning the courts finding. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
ROTHSCHILD, J.
We concur:
VOGEL, J.
MALLANO, Acting P.J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.
[1] Penal Code section 626.10, subdivision (a) states in relevant part: Any person . . . who brings or possesses any dirk [or] dagger . . . upon the grounds of . . . any public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, is guilty of a public offense[.]
[2] For purposes of section 626.10, the term dirk or dagger means a knife or other instrument with or without a handgurard that is capable or ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death. (Pen. Code, 626.10, subd. (h), italics added.)
