In re T.R. CA2/5 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Filed 11/20/14 In re T.R. CA2/5
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
    SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION FIVE
    In re T.R., a Person Coming Under the                                B255471
    Juvenile Court Law.                                                  (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. KJ38100)
    THE PEOPLE,
    Plaintiff and Respondent,
    v.
    T.R.,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Geanene
    Yriate, Judge. Affirmed.
    Courtney M. Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    The juvenile court sustained a petition alleging that appellant T.R. committed
    second degree robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211. The court found that
    appellant was a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, adjudged
    appellant to be a ward of the court, and placed appellant on home probation.
    Appellant appeals from the orders sustaining the petition and adjudging him to be
    a ward of the court. Finding no error, we affirm the juvenile court’s orders.
    Facts
    On April 9, 2013, about 10:00 p.m., Shah Aram was working as a cashier at a
    7-Eleven store in Covina. The store was busy. Appellant entered, and moved around
    within the store. After all the customers had left the store, appellant came to the counter
    area where the cash register was located, then went behind the counter. When Aram tried
    to stop appellant from coming into this area, appellant raised his skateboard up in the air.
    Aram reached out and tried to block appellant’s arms, but appellant kept coming. Aram
    was able to slide by appellant, and move to the front door.
    Appellant moved around to the area behind the counter, touched the cash register,
    took some packages of Marlboro Red cigarettes from the area behind the counter, and
    then ran out of the store. Aram activated the store’s alarm.
    Covina Police Department Officer Stacy Franco responded to the 7-Eleven store
    and interviewed Aram. Soon thereafter, Officer Franco found appellant in the parking lot
    of a nearby K-Mart store. He had a package of Marlboro Red cigarettes in his shirt
    pocket.
    Several days later, Officer Franco returned to the store and viewed store
    surveillance video of the robbery. She attempted to download the video, but was not able
    to do so. Officer Franco took still photographs of some parts of the video. The video
    2
    was on a loop and was subsequently erased. The photographs were entered into evidence
    at the adjudication of this matter.
    Appellant testified in his own defense and explained that he went to the store to
    buy a cigar, became frustrated when the cashier said the store did not have the cigars, and
    went behind the counter intending to get it himself. The cashier became upset. Appellant
    believed the cashier was going to hit him, and so appellant raised his skateboard to
    protect himself. Appellant decided to “let it go,” grabbed some cigarettes and left some
    money on the counter which he believed would cover the cost of the cigarettes.
    Discussion
    Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent
    him on appeal. Appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende
    (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    , and requested this court to independently review the record on
    appeal to determine whether any arguable issues exist.1
    On September 10, 2014, we advised appellant he had 30 days in which to
    personally submit any contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. To date, we
    have not received a supplemental brief from appellant.
    1
    On October 6, 2014, appellant’s counsel filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus.
    The petition claimed trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to file a
    motion pursuant to Arizona v. Youngblood (1988) 
    488 U.S. 51
    , in response to law
    enforcement’s failure to preserve the surveillance video of the incident. On October 16,
    2014, this Court denied the petition.
    3
    We have examined the entire record and are satisfied appellant's attorney
    has fully complied with her responsibilities and no arguable issues exist. (People v.
    Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)
    Disposition
    The court’s orders are affirmed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
    GOODMAN, J.*
    We concur:
    TURNER, P.J.
    KRIEGLER, J.
    *
    Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to
    article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B255471

Filed Date: 11/20/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021