In re B.L. CA2/3

Filed 1/27/14 In re B.L. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

In re B.L., a Person Coming Under the B245912 Juvenile Court Law. _____________________________________ (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KJ37719) THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

B.L.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Phyllis Shibata, Temporary Judge. Affirmed. Jeanine G. Strong, 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, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Analee J. Brodie, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________________________

B.L. appeals after the court ordered him a ward of the juvenile court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) as he had engaged in a battery upon his grandmother and his cousin (Pen. Code, § 242) and malicious mischief (Pen. Code, § 594, subd. (a)). He was ordered removed from the custody of his grandmother, his legal guardian, and suitably placed. The maximum term of confinement was one year four months, less 24 days. He contends the evidence is insufficient to support the juvenile court’s orders that he committed battery. The contention lacks merit. BACKGROUND 1. The People’s case-in-chief. On the date of the offenses, October 24, 2012, B.L. (appellant) was 14 years of age. He lived in Baldwin Park with his grandmother, E. R. (Mrs. R.), age 64. We view the evidence adduced at the adjudication in the light most favorable to orders of the juvenile court. (In re Roderick P. (1972) 7 Cal.3d 801, 809; In re Ryan N. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1372-1373.) Mrs. R. was the legal guardian for her daughter’s children: appellant, Dominic, age seven, Alicia, age 13, and Helena, age 12. Also, when her granddaughter S.G. (S.), appellant’s cousin, age 19, was at work, Mrs. R. took care of S.’s daughter, age three. a. S.G.’s testimony. On October 24, 2012, appellant was suspended from school. His cousin, S., left work and picked him up at school. Appellant told her that he was upset Mrs. R. did not come personally to pick him up. He told S. for that reason, he was “going to cause a scene” when he got home. On S.’s part, this was not the first time that week that S. had to leave work to go to the school to drive appellant home. She was worried about this affecting her job, and she was annoyed with him. He had a bad attitude about the suspensions: he acted as if being suspended “was funny.”