In re Brianna S.
Filed 9/27/06 In re Brianna S. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| In re BRIANNA S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BRIANNA S., Defendant and Appellant. |
F049958
(Super. Ct. No. 05CEJ600506-1)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Timothy Kams, Judge.
Rudy Kraft, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. French, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
On September 14, 2005, a first amended petition was filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging that appellant, Brianna S., committed two counts of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664 & 187, subd. (a), counts one & three), two counts of assault likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1), counts two & four), arson of an inhabited structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (b), count five), felonious taking or driving a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a), count six), and receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a), count seven). Brianna was given three psychological evaluations. On September 29, 2005, she entered into a plea agreement admitting counts two, four, five, six, and seven. Counts one and three were dismissed.
During the March 7, 2006, disposition hearing, the juvenile court found the seriousness of Brianna’s offenses and her special needs warranted her commitment to the California Youth Authority (CYA).[1] The court found Brianna’s maximum term of confinement was nine years four months. The court found Brianna’s mental health was a mitigating factor and the vulnerability of the victims was an aggravating factor. The court imposed the midterm of five years on count five, the arson allegation, stayed terms on counts two and four, and imposed concurrent terms of three years on counts six and seven.
Brianna’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The opening brief also includes the declaration of appellate counsel indicating that Brianna was advised she could file her own brief with this court. By letter on June 20, 2006, we invited Brianna to submit additional briefing. To date, she has not done so.
After independent review of the record, we have concluded no reasonably arguable legal or factual argument exists.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
* Before Vartabedian, Acting P..J., Harris, J., and Levy, J.
[1] CYA was renamed the Division of Juvenile Justice of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation effective July 1, 2005, (see Gov. Code, §§ 12838, subd. (a) & 12838.3). For consistency, we retain the designation of CYA as used by the trial court.
