In re G.G. CA6

Filed 3/26/25 In re G.G. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re G.G., a Person Coming Under the H051524 Juvenile Court Law. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 23JV46125A)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

G.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

The juvenile court adjudged the minor, G.G., a ward of the court after sustaining an allegation that G.G. committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211).1 The juvenile court found not true an allegation that G.G. personally used a handgun in the commission of the robbery (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). G.G. asserts that substantial evidence does not support the finding that he committed second degree robbery. We will affirm the judgment.

1 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

I. BACKGROUND A juvenile wardship petition alleged that G.G. committed second degree robbery (§ 211) and that he personally used a handgun in the commission of the robbery (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). At the contested jurisdictional hearing, a gas station/convenience store clerk testified that two juveniles entered the store. The clerk testified that after a while, the two juveniles brought a drink and a bag of chips to the counter. The clerk testified that the two juveniles told him their items were free and he responded that they needed to pay. A third juvenile wearing a hooded sweatshirt featuring the letters “GAP” then came into the store and asked the other two what was taking so long. The clerk testified that as he was setting the items aside, one of the juveniles grabbed a bag of chips and the group left the store. The clerk initially testified that the third juvenile with the “GAP” sweatshirt—later identified as G.G.—was the one who grabbed the bag of chips. However, on cross-examination, the clerk testified that the third juvenile did not take anything. The store’s manager testified that the clerk alerted him to the situation, and that as he came out from his office, he saw the three juveniles leaving the store. The manager testified that he ran after the three juveniles. Outside the store, the manager testified, one of the juveniles had his hand under his shirt about waist high and said “stay away or we will shoot you,” or words to that effect. The manager told police who responded to the store that he saw this juvenile display a handgun. However, at the jurisdictional hearing, the manager testified that he only saw “like a silver object” that could have been a handgun but also could have been “like a buckle of belt or something else.” The manager testified that his statement to police was the result of “panic.” The manager repeatedly told police that the juvenile wearing the “GAP” hooded sweatshirt was the one who displayed a gun and made the statement about shooting the manager. At the jurisdictional hearing, the manager initially testified that he did not remember what the person who displayed the object and made the statement was