1 Filed 11/13/13 In re N.N. CA4/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELL ATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

In re N.N., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. N.N., Defendant and Appellant. E059095 (Super.Ct.No. J233260)

OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Sa n Bernardino County. Brian D. Saunders, Judge. Affirmed. James M. Crawford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Over a period of three years, the minor had a total of six juvenile delinquency petitions sustained against him. After initia lly being placed at home on probation, the2 minor progressed to serving time in juvenile ha ll, and then was placed at Boys’ Republic, from which he ran away. Despite being warned that further transgressions would lead to a commitment to Gateway, the minor ran away from the Excell Center in Turlock, which resulted in the sixth petition and a commitment to Gateway. In his notice of appeal, the minor appeals from the disposition order placi ng him at Gateway. As discussed below we affirm the judgment.

F ACTS AND P ROCEDURE First Petition – June 8, 2010 The minor and his brother were riding th eir bicycles on the streets and sidewalks, nearly colliding with cars and pedestrians alike. After one such pedestrian protested, the minor told him “I’m going to fuck you up,” removed a knife from his pocket and started to open the blade. A petition filed under Welfare and Institutio ns Code section 602, subdivision (a), charged the minor with making criminal th reats (Pen. Code, § 422) and alleged he personally used a deadly weapon, a knife (P en. Code, § 12022, s ubd. (b)(1)). The minor admitted the criminal threats charge in ex change for the People dismissing the arming enhancement. After disposition, the minor wa s released from juvenile hall and placed at home on probation. Second Petition – May 24, 2011 The minor was found pushing a shopping ca rt containing several large batteries that had been stolen from a bus yard. The minor had a wrench in his pocket.3 The People filed a subse quent petition charging the minor with receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)). After the People moved to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor, the minor admitted the allegation. At disposition, the minor was ordered to serve 30 days in juvenile ha ll without credit fo r time served.

Third Petition – D ecember 2, 2011 The minor and several other juveniles chas ed the victim and his friend while they were walking near a park. The minor pus hed the victim and t ook a phone from the

victim’s hand when he tr ied to call for help. The People filed a subse quent petition charging the mi nor with second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211). The minor eventually admitted the charge. The minor was ordered to serve 60 days in juveni le hall with credit for 13 days. Fourth Petition – October 23, 2012 The minor got into a verbal argument with the victim at the victim’s home. The minor made several comments, including “Crip se t. I’ll be back.” The minor returned a brief time later carrying a black and red bag. When the victim calle d 911, the minor took a 9-milimeter gun from the bag and placed it in a storage cabinet in the carport. Responding police found the gun, and the mino r’s companion told po lice that the minor had placed it there. The People filed a subsequent petiti on charging the minor with possessing a firearm as a minor (Pen. Code, § 29610), tr espass (Pen. Code, § 602, subd. (m)), and making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422). Defendant admitted the firearm possession4 charge in return for the other counts being dismissed. The minor was placed at Boys’ Republic. Fifth Petition – December 27, 2012 The minor never made it to Boys’ Re public. He “absconded” while being transported there. The People filed a supplemental petition alle ging the minor violated his probation. The juvenile court dismissed the probation violation and petition after the minor agreed to be re-placed. The court told the mi nor that his next di sposition would be a commitment to Gateway if he again violated the terms of his probation. The minor was placed at EE Residential in San Jose. He wa s transferred to Excell Center in Turlock on April 2, 2013 for “administrative reasons” beca use of “the progress of the minor and the program.” Excell is a ranch st yle setting and is closer to the minor’s home and family. Sixth Petition – May 30, 2013 The minor became agitated after trying to use the telephone without permission. He picked up chairs in the kitchen and slamme d them to the floor. He punched two holes in the wall and told staff he was going to “fuck up all the staff.” He packed up his things and left. The minor’s probation officer asked that he be re-placed because he needed a “highly structured environment with constant supervision.” The People filed a supplemental petition a lleging the minor violated his probation by failing to “Obey the reasonabl e and proper orders of the staff” and failing to “Not leave the premises or program-sanctioned activ ities without explicit authority . . . .” The

minor admitted the first violation in exchan ge for the People dismissing the second5 violation. At disposition, the minor asked to be placed in juvenile hall until he became 18 years old in February of 2014. However, th e juvenile court ordered the minor committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice’s Gateway facility. This appeal followed.

D ISCUSSION

After the minor appealed, and upon his re quest, this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has file d a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979)

25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 se tting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the f acts, and potential arguable issu es, and requesting this court

to undertake a review of the entire record. We offered minor an opportun ity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he has

not done so. Pursuant to the mandate of People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have conducted an indepe ndent review of the record and find no arguable issues.

D ISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS RAMIREZ P. J.

We concur:

RICHLI J.

CODRINGTON J.