Filed 7/31/24 In re W.W. CA1/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

In re W.W., a Person Coming 

Under the Juvenile Court 

Law.

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

W.W.,

Defendant and Appellant.

A168851 

(Contra Costa County

Super. Ct. No. J23-00449)

W.W. appeals from a no contest plea to a single felony 

count of assault likely to cause great bodily injury in violation of 

Penal Code1 section 245, subdivision (a)(4), and a single 

misdemeanor count of taking property from the person of another 

in violation of section 487, subdivision (c). His court-appointed 

counsel has filed a brief seeking our review of the record 

pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) to 

determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. We 

conclude there are no issues requiring further review and affirm. 

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 
2

I. BACKGROUND

In June 2023, seventeen-year-old W.W. and a friend were 

to meet the victim under the guise of buying a PS5 video gaming 

device from him. Instead, they robbed the victim of the device, 

and W.W.’s friend shot the victim in his left thigh. 

A petition was filed under Welfare and Institutions Code 

section 602 charging W.W. with second degree robbery with an 

enhancement due to the use of a firearm by a principal in the 

commission of the crime. (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c), 12022,

subd. (a)(1).) W.W.’s age and the nature of the charge made him 

ineligible for deferred entry of judgment. 

At the pretrial conference, W.W.’s counsel informed the 

court of a negotiated disposition and his willingness to enter a no 

contest plea to an amended petition. The petition was amended 

to add a single count of felony assault likely to cause great bodily 

injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) and a single count of theft from the 

person of another (§ 487, subd. (c)), a misdemeanor. The juvenile 

court questioned W.W. on his willingness to enter a no contest 

plea, the voluntariness of his plea and his waiver of his 

constitutional rights. 

W.W. entered no contest pleas to the new counts, and the 

court found a factual basis for the plea. The original robbery 

charge was dismissed. (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c).) He was retained 

in custody pending disposition. 

W.W. and his siblings had a lengthy history of involvement 

with the dependency system, and at the disposition hearing the 

court learned of a possible open dependency case where W.W. had 
3

been declared a ward in Fresno County. The court continued the 

hearing in order to get further information on those dependency 

proceedings. 

The Fresno case was opened in July 2020 and was pending 

without any final order. W.W. and his sister had absconded from 

foster care in Fresno County, and at the time of the disposition 

hearing were living with their mother. Accordingly, the juvenile 

court initiated proceedings under Welfare and Institutions Code 

section 241.1 to determine whether probation or child welfare

services would be the most appropriate agency for W.W.’s 

supervision. After considering W.W.’s history of contact with law 

enforcement, education, and the unsuccessful efforts of the child 

welfare and family support systems in his case, the juvenile court 

determined that the probation department would provide W.W. 

the most rehabilitative and appropriate services. 

Due to the seriousness of the offense and W.W.’s 

unsuccessful history with child and family services in several 

counties, the court did not issue a community placement. 

Instead, the court determined that W.W.’s welfare required he be 

removed from his family or guardians and placed in the custody 

of the probation department. He was committed to a county 

institution for the maximum custody time of three years four 

months or age 25. He was issued 54 days of presentence credit 

and ordered to participate in the Commitment Pathway Program 

at the Briones Youth Academy. He was informed of his 

conditions of probation and assessed a $100 restitution fine. 

W.W.’s appeal is timely. 
4

II. DISCUSSION

Counsel has represented that W.W. was advised of 

counsel’s intention to file a Wende brief in this case and of his

right to submit supplemental written argument on his own 

behalf. He has not done so. W.W. has also been advised of his 

right to request that counsel be relieved.

W.W.’s no contest plea appears from the record to be free, 

knowledgeable, and voluntary. His sentencing was in accord 

with the discretion and choices legally available to the juvenile 

court. The restitution fine was imposed in lawful measure.

Our full review of the record reveals no issue that requires 

further briefing.

III. DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.
5

SIGGINS, J.*

WE CONCUR:

HUMES, P. J.

BANKE, J.

A168851

In re W.W.

* Retired Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, First 

Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to 

article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.