Filed 9/20/17 In re A.N. CA3
Received for posting 9/25/17
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
| In re A.N., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | C083843
|
|
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
A.N.,
Defendant and Appellant.
|
(Super. Ct. No. JV138140)
|
Appointed counsel for minor A.N. has asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; see also In re Kevin S. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 97, 119 [Wende procedure applies to appeals in juvenile delinquency cases].) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to minor, we shall affirm the orders of the juvenile court.
BACKGROUND
On July 8, 2016, Mathew O., Jose R., and Martin S. were riding on a light rail train in Sacramento County, with their bicycles, when they met the minor and J.G. J.G. asked Matthew and his friends about their bicycles. Soon after, J.G. grabbed Matthew’s bicycle. In the ensuing struggle between J.G. and Matthew for the bicycle, a spring-assisted knife fell from J.G.’s pants. J.G. pointed the knife at Matthew and Martin.
Matthew and his friends got off the train at the next stop. Matthew threw his bicycle off the train to try to get away as quickly as he could. J.G. and the minor got off the train as well. J.G. and Matthew resumed struggling over the bicycle. The minor asked J.G. if he really wanted to do this. When J.G. said he did, the minor assisted J.G. in trying to take the bicycle from Matthew. J.G. and the minor eventually prevailed, and left with the bicycle.
Following a contested hearing, the juvenile court sustained an allegation of second degree robbery. (Pen. Code, § 211.) The court adjudged the minor a ward of the court, and placed him on probation with five days in juvenile hall with credit for five days served, 19 days on home supervision with credit for 19 days served, and 113 days of electronic monitoring with credit for 113 days served.
DISCUSSION
Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and requesting we review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) The minor was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication from the minor.
Having examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to the minor.
DISPOSITION
The orders of the juvenile court are affirmed.
/s/
Duarte, J.
We concur:
/s/
Murray, Acting P. J.
/s/
Hoch, J.
