Opinion
Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J0601028
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Kline, P. J.
S.S., a minor, appeals from a judgment of the juvenile court sustaining two petitions collectively alleging commission of single counts of petty theft, burglary and forgery (Pen. Code, §§ 484, subd. (a), 459, 460, subd. (b), 470, subd. (a)), all of which are misdemeanors, on the basis of her admission of such offenses. Her court-appointed attorney has filed a brief raising no legal issues and asking this court to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.
PROCEEDINGS BELOW
On August 11, 2006, a petition was filed in Contra Costa Juvenile Court alleging that appellant, then 17 years of age, had committed three counts of second degree burglary, three counts of forgery, three counts of making, possessing and uttering a fictitious instrument, one count of receiving stolen property, one count of giving false information to a peace officer, and one count of petty theft.
On September 5, 2006, a petition was filed in San Francisco Juvenile Court alleging that appellant had committed second degree burglary and a petty theft. The next day, appellant admitted the latter offense and the former was dismissed and the case transferred to Contra Costa County Juvenile Court for a jurisdictional hearing.
On November 1 appellant admitted one count each of burglary and forgery, both misdemeanors, and the remaining allegations of the petition filed in that court were dismissed.
On December 6, 2006, appellant was adjudged a ward of the court and also found to have violated a home supervision order. Appellant was placed in her mother’s home with credit for 19 days in juvenile hall and 80 days on electronic monitoring, and placed on home supervision for 90 days. The court imposed a restitution fine of $75 and juvenile court fees, and ordered appellant to attend counseling, pursue her GED and seek gainful employment.
Appellant admitted violating terms of her probation on August 14, 2007. Thirteen days later the court continued appellant on probation, with credit for time served and again ordered her to complete school or obtain a GED. On November 20 a supplemental petition was filed alleging that appellant, now 18, had failed to attend counseling and to obtain a GED, as had been ordered.
Appellant admitted this violation on April 15, 2008 (all further dates are in that year) and the court ordered an updated probation report.
Timely notices of appeal of the May 20, 2008 and August 26, 2008, orders were thereafter filed.
FACTS
Appellant’s original arrest took place after she ran away from home taking her mother’s checkbook and tried to use those checks. When her mother refused to take her home she was temporarily placed in a group home, from which she ran away and was later arrested for shoplifting. After those two arrests she returned to her mother’s home and began working part-time and attending adult education classes.
After violating probation by leaving her mother’s home and failing to attend counseling and school, appellant committed no new offenses and tested negative for drugs. She had enrolled in GED prep classes, but had missed some classes.
According to a probation report dated May 20, appellant had paid the restitution fine and had promised to pay the juvenile hall fees shortly, when she received her first check from a new job. She had taken GED tests but had not yet passed three subjects. The probation department recommended that wardship be terminated upon her payment of those fees. However, the court determined to extend probation until appellant passed the GED test. On May 20, 2008, following a hearing, the court extended probation with all prior orders remaining in effect.
According to an August 26 probation memorandum, appellant had not then paid the $69 juvenile hall fee and instead of repeating the GED exams had enrolled in a program providing individualized educational assistance that would hopefully enable her to earn a high school diploma and obtain job skills. She expected to receive a diploma by the end of 2008. The court continued the matter for 90 days to provide appellant the time to pay the fees and obtain a diploma. On August 26, 2008, the court again refused to vacate and dismiss the probation, but continued appellant on probation with prior orders in effect.
DISCUSSION
The scope of reviewable issues on appeal after the sustaining of allegations of a petition on the basis of admissions is restricted to matters based on constitutional, jurisdictional, or other grounds going to the legality of the proceedings leading to the admissions; guilt or innocence are not included. (See People v. DeVaughn (1977) 18 Cal.3d 889, 895-896.)
Appellant did not admit any of the allegations in the petitions filed against her until after she had been fully advised of and waived her rights to trial and silence, to subpoena witnesses, and to confront witnesses against her. She had also been timely advised that her admissions could result in placement in a locked facility for a maximum of one year. Prior to making her admissions, appellant stated that no threats or promises were made to induce her to admit any charges, except that certain counts would be dismissed with restitution reserved.
The record established that appellant’s admissions were made freely, voluntarily, and knowingly.
Appellant was at all times represented by competent counsel who guarded her rights and interests.
The sentences imposed are all authorized by law.
Our independent review discloses no arguable legal issues requiring further briefing.
DISPOSITION
The judgments sustain the petitions and the sentences imposed are affirmed.
We concur: Lambden, J., Richman, J