Court Opinion

ID: 9371225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-15 19:02:27.381226+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:37.796625
License: Public Domain

Filed 2/15/23 In re Mylicia G. CA4/1
                 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.

                COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                 DIVISION ONE

                                         STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In re Mylicia G., a Person Coming
Under the Juvenile Court Law.
                                                                D080891
THE PEOPLE,

         Plaintiff and Respondent,                              (Super. Ct. No. JCM242239)

         v.

MYLICIA G.,

         Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Rohanee Zapanta, Judge. Affirmed.
         John Derrick, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
         In this case, 16-year-old Mylicia G. (the Minor) admitted committing a
robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and admitted the use of a knife in the commission
of the offense. The court committed the Minor to the Youthful Offender Unit
Program for a period not to exceed 480 days. Thereafter, the court held a
restitution hearing at which the victim testified. The victim said the
perpetrators, including the Minor, stole her phone valued at $290, $300 in
cash, a wallet containing $25, and her food stamps. Her backpack was also
damaged during the robbery. The victim calculated her losses at $642. The
court ordered restitution in the amount requested. The order requires
payment at the rate of $25 per month and is jointly payable by the Minor and
the Minor’s parents.
      The Minor filed a timely notice of appeal challenging only the
restitution order.
      Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any
arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the
record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered the Minor the
opportunity to file the Minor’s own brief on appeal, but the Minor has not
responded.
                                DISCUSSION
      As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks
the court to review the record for error. Counsel has not complied with
Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) by identifying the possible
issues that counsel considered in preparing this appeal. We disapprove of
counsel’s failure to deal with Anders, however, in this case the appeal is
narrow, and the pertinent record is brief. We have been able to review the
record without counsel’s compliance with Anders.
      We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders.
We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.
Competent counsel has represented the Minor on this appeal.

                                       2
                               DISPOSITION
     The restitution order is affirmed.

                                             HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

O’ROURKE, J.

DATO, J.

                                      3