In re Kaylee R.
Filed 9/28/06 In re Kaylee R. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 KAYLEE R., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KAYLEE R., Defendant and Appellant. |
F049806
(Super. Ct. No. 05CEJ601576-1)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Martin Suits, Temporary Judge. (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.)
Kathleen C. Page, 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 November 18, 2005, a petition was filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 alleging that appellant, Kaylee R., committed misdemeanor hit-and-run (Veh. Code, § 20002, subd. (a)). On January 9, 2006, Kaylee waived her constitutional rights and admitted the allegation. It was further determined at the hearing that Kaylee was a member of a recognized Indian Tribe.
On February 14, 2006, the juvenile court adopted the recommendations of the probation officer’s report. The court made Kaylee a ward of the court, temporarily removing her from her mother’s custody. The court placed Kaylee on probation upon various terms and conditions, including that she be schooled at the Day Reporting Center Program with electronic monitoring for up to 180 days.
Kaylee’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 Kaylee was advised she could file her own brief with this court. By letter on July 11, 2006, we invited Kaylee 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 Harris, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.
