In re Rhonda M. CA2/7

Filed 7/22/13 In re Rhonda M. CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

In re RHONDA M., a Person Coming B240717 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NJ23718)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

RHONDA M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Fumiko Wasserman, Judge. Affirmed. Holly Jackson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey and David Zarmi, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. __________________________

Rhonda M. appeals from an order declaring her a ward of the court and directing her into the Harbor View Adolescent Center after finding she had committed first degree burglary. Rhonda contends there was insufficient evidence she aided and abetted the commission of the offense. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Juana Enciso was outside her house and saw Rhonda, then 16 years old, and a boy, later identified as Rhonda‟s cousin, approach the house of Carmina Tostado, who lived across the street. The boy knocked on the front door while Rhonda stood next to him on the porch. When no one answered, the boy climbed into the house through a window; and Rhonda turned and entered the front yard where she began walking around and looking in all directions, “as if she was watching out.” Enciso‟s son telephoned the police. Rhonda started to walk away from the Tostado house as Los Angeles County Sheriff‟s deputies were responding. Deputy Edgar Bonilla saw Rhonda standing on the front porch and the boy coming out of a window. Both were taken into custody. Notified of the burglary, Tostado arrived to find her house had been ransacked. Tostado told deputies she did not know either Rhonda or the boy and reported some earrings were missing from her daughter‟s bedroom. At the close of the People‟s evidence the juvenile court denied a defense motion to dismiss the allegation for insufficient evidence pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 701.1. Rhonda neither testified nor presented other evidence in her defense. After hearing argument by counsel, the juvenile court sustained the petition, declared the offense a felony and found Rhonda to be a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. At the disposition hearing Rhonda was declared a ward of the court and ordered suitably placed at the Harbor View Adolescent Center with 90 days 1 of predisposition credit.