In re C.B. CA6

Filed 6/27/14 In re C.B. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 C.B., a Person Coming H039614 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Santa Clara County ___________________________________ Super. Ct. No. 3-11-JV-38000G)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

C.B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

The District Attorney filed a juvenile wardship petition charging appellant C.B., a minor (hereafter, appellant), with conduct that would have constituted second degree robbery if committed by an adult. (Pen. Code, § 212.5, subd. (c).)1 The District Attorney further alleged that appellant used a dangerous and deadly weapon—a knife—in the commission of the offense. (§§ 667, 1192.7.) At the time of the offense, appellant was a ward of the court on previously sustained petitions. After a contested jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court sustained the robbery count but made no finding on the

1 Subsequent undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

weapon allegation. The court continued appellant’s wardship and found the maximum term of confinement to be nine years and three months. On appeal, appellant contends his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to object to the introduction of inadmissible character evidence at the jurisdictional hearing. We conclude the claim lacks merit and we will affirm the judgment. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Facts of the Offense On February 2, 2013, appellant, who was on furlough from the William F. James Boys Ranch, went with two friends to San José to attend a birthday party for another teenager, G.C. Also attending the party were two teenage boys—C.J. and K.N.—who testified for the prosecution. C.J. and K.N. testified as follows: At around 4:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m., the boys were in the back yard smoking marijuana when appellant took out a black, flip-blade knife with a 3-inch blade. Appellant pointed the knife at C.J., and took a bag of marijuana out of C.J.’s pocket. While appellant held the knife at C.J.’s neck, he (appellant) searched through C.J.’s other pockets. Appellant removed cash, headphones, and a small pocketknife from C.J.’s pockets, in addition to the marijuana.2 Appellant told C.J. not to snitch, and threatened to “rob [C.J.’s] house” if he told anyone about the robbery. Before leaving the party, appellant gave the headphones back to C.J. at C.J.’s request. The day after the party, appellant’s sister retrieved C.J.’s pocketknife from appellant and gave it back to C.J. Appellant’s parents and siblings testified for the defense. Appellant’s mother testified that he was at home on the day in question, but she admitted that she had left the home for two hours around 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. She took appellant back to the Boys