Filed 6/28/17 In re J.W. CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE


In re J.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
J.W.,
Defendant and Appellant.



A150019

(Solano County
Super. Ct. No. J42874)


This is an appeal from judgment after J.W. (minor) admitted to the juvenile court the allegation of a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition that he committed felony robbery. Pursuant to the juvenile court’s order, minor was continued as a ward of the court and committed to the Challenge Program, a locked juvenile program, for a maximum term of confinement of five years, 8 months. The court also granted minor 92 days of total credits and ordered him to, among other things, pay a $100 restitution fine.
After minor filed a timely notice of appeal, appellate counsel was appointed to represent him. Appointed counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (People v. Wende), in which she raises no issue for appeal and asks this court for an independent review of the record. (See also People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 124 (People v. Kelly).) Counsel attests that minor was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief in a timely manner, but he has not exercised such right.
We have examined the entire record in accordance with People v. Wende. For reasons set forth below, we agree with counsel no arguable issue exists on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On February 17, 2015, a juvenile wardship petition was filed in Solano County pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 (section 602 petition), alleging that minor, born in November 1998, committed the felony offense of possession of a firearm by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610) (count one), the felony offense of possession of live ammunition by a minor (Pen. Code, § 29650) (count two), and the misdemeanor offense of resisting, obstructing and delaying a peace officer or emergency medical technician (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)) (count three).
These allegations were based on the following undisputed record of facts. On February 14, 2015, police responded to a report of suspicious activity in a residential area in Benicia. Upon their arrival, the officers found minor near some bushes in front of a residence with a female companion standing nearby. The officers were able to apprehend minor after he ran behind a nearby house, at which time they found a loaded black semi-automatic weapon in the bushes. Minor later admitted to the officers that he possessed marijuana and explained that he had found the firearm near railroad tracks in the vicinity of Vallejo High School.
On February 23, 2015, minor admitted count one and, on March 9, 2015, he was made a ward of the court and placed on felony probation.
On April 18, 2016, another section 602 petition was filed, alleging that minor committed two felony offenses of receiving stolen property in violation of Penal Code section 496, subdivision (a). This petition followed minor’s arrest at home in the possession of two stolen iPhones and 0.3 grams of marijuana during a probation search. Minor explained that he found the two iPhones at school the previous evening when leaving prom.
On April 22, 2016, both of these counts were dismissed, and minor admitted violating probation by “fail[ing] to obey all laws.” At the subsequent dispositional hearing, minor was referred to a drug treatment program (where he was put on a waitlist) after it was disclosed that he had recently submitted three positive drug tests for marijuana.
On July 13, 2016, a notice of probation violation was filed against minor and, the next day, he admitted one violation for failing to abstain from marijuana after submitting two positive drug tests for marijuana in June 2016.
Between August and September 2016, minor tested positive for marijuana three times. On September 13, 2016, his probation officer directed him to enroll in the Kaiser Chemical Dependency Recovery Program.
On September 21, 2016, a third section 602 petition was filed, this time in San Francisco County, alleging that minor committed two felony offenses of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) (counts one and two), and one felony offense of attempted robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211/664) (count three). This petition followed minor’s arrest on September 19, 2016 near Sacramento Street after two victims reported that a black male, later identified as minor, had stolen or attempted to steal items they had been carrying as they walked down the street (to wit, a lunch bag and a purse). While minor and his accomplices initially fled the scene, police stopped their vehicle shortly thereafter, finding stolen property inside.
On October 27, 2016, minor admitted count one and his case was transferred to Solano County.
On November 18, 2016, following a contested dispositional hearing, minor was continued as a ward of the court and, at the probation department’s recommendation, committed to the Challenge Program, a locked juvenile program, for a maximum term of confinement of 5 years, 8 months. In ordering this commitment, the court first considered (before rejecting) the option of ordering minor to New Foundations, a drug treatment program. The court also, among other things, granted minor 92 days of total credits, ordered him to pay a $100 restitution fine, and prohibited him from possessing a firearm until age 30 (Pen. Code, § 29820, subd. (b)). A timely notice of appeal followed.
DISCUSSION
Neither appointed counsel nor minor has identified any issue for our review. Upon our own independent review of the record, we agree none exists. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) The juvenile court committed minor to Challenge Academy, a locked juvenile program, after minor admitted committing felony robbery. Before reaching this decision, the court expressly advised minor that, by admitting the offense, he was waiving his right to an evidentiary hearing on the offense. The court also accepted testimony and argument from the parties regarding the appropriateness of committing minor to Challenge Academy, as probation had recommended, rather than New Foundations, a drug treatment program. Minor, for his part, denied being under the influence of marijuana when he committed the robbery. In addition, minor’s probation officer testified that his “criminality supersedes his drug use,” and that his criminal behavior had been “escalating.” The probation officer added that a program like Challenge Academy would enable minor to receive cognitive behavioral and career/college programming in addition to drug treatment, which, in turn, was the only program offered at New Foundations. This record more than suffices to support the court’s acceptance of minor’s admission of guilt and its subsequent decision to commit him to Challenge Academy for a maximum term of confinement of 5 years, 8 months. (In re Robert H. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1317, 1330 [“ ‘We must indulge all reasonable inferences to support the decision of the juvenile court and will not disturb its findings when there is substantial evidence to support them’ ”]; In re I.M. (2005) 125 Cal.App.4th 1195, 1208-1209 [“[California’s statutory scheme] confers broad power on the courts to impose conditions to foster rehabilitation and to protect public safety”].)
Thus, having ensured minor has received adequate and effective appellate review, we affirm the juvenile court’s findings and dispositional order. (People v. Kelly, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 112-113; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment of the juvenile court is affirmed.


_________________________
Jenkins, J.


We concur:


_________________________
McGuiness, P. J.


_________________________
Pollak, J.








In re J.W., A150019