In re Blake W. CA4/3

Filed 12/13/13 In re Blake W. CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re BLAKE W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE, G048127 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DL043630) v. OPINION BLAKE W.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gregory W. Jones, Judge. Affirmed. Sylvia Whatley Beckham, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Meagan J. Beale and William M. Wood, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In this juvenile court proceeding, appellant was placed on probation for committing burglary and possessing a controlled substance without a prescription. He contends the court erred in denying his request for deferred entry of judgment and failing to apply Penal Code section 654 in calculating his maximum period of confinement. We reject these contentions and affirm the judgment. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 6, 2012, appellant was among a group of teens drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana in the backyard of Janel M’s house. Janel was not home at the time, but her son, who is developmentally disabled, was with the group. At some point, appellant and his friend David snuck into Janel’s house and began looking for objects to steal. Among other things, they made off with a gold watch, video game equipment, a lockbox full of old medicine and two bottles of medication that were currently prescribed to Janel’s husband, Ultram and Vicodin. Later that day, the police questioned appellant about the incident, and he denied stealing anything from Janel’s home. However, when David was interviewed, he admitted he and appellant took a variety of items from the house. Explaining their m.o., David said he distracted and kept an eye on Janel’s mentally challenged son, while appellant rummaged through the house looking for things to steal. The next day, the police were called to the home of one of appellant’s friends in regard to an unrelated theft. When the officers arrived there, appellant was sitting next to a “glass marijuana bong” that he admitted owning. Appellant was also in possession of a burnt straw and five Ultram pills. When asked about the pills, appellant said he bought them that day from a friend with money he had stolen from his parents. He admitted he used drugs every day, and, although his preference was for prescription drugs, he used heroin if they were not available. The police arrested appellant and released him to his father.