In re A.J. CA2/3

Filed 8/5/14 In re A.J. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re A.J., a Person Coming B250167 Under the Juvenile Court Law. _____________________________________ (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. FJ51030) THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

A.J.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles Scarlett, Judge. Affirmed. Kimberly Howland Meyer, 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, Victoria B. Wilson and Mark E. Weber, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

A.J. (appellant) appeals the juvenile court’s orders of wardship (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) following findings appellant committed the offenses of possessing marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359) and possessing an enumerated tool or marking substance with the intent to commit vandalism or to affix graffiti (Pen. Code, § 594.2, subd. (a)). The juvenile court ordered appellant home on probation. He contends: (1) his admission the backpack was his was obtained without an advisement of, and waiver of, Miranda rights (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436); and (2) if the officer’s testimony appellant acknowledged the backpack containing the contraband was properly excluded from evidence, the evidence supporting the juvenile court’s order is insufficient to support the orders of wardship. BACKGROUND In a petition filed on February 6, 2013, it was alleged the 17-year-old appellant came within the provisions of section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code in that he possessed marijuana for sale (count 1), he committed vandalism with $400 or less of damage by marking a table belonging to a Jack-In-The-Box restaurant (count 2) and he possessed markers and a scribing tool for the purpose of committing vandalism or affixing graffiti (count 3). 1. The People’s case-in-chief. At about 9:30 p.m. on December 2, 2012, Santa Monica Police Officer Martin Jauregui (Officer Jauregui) and his partner stopped a car on Lincoln Boulevard for a traffic violation. There were three youths in the car. Officer Jauregui had the driver step out of the car. The officer saw the handle of a gun in the pocket of the driver’s door. He handcuffed the driver and had him sit at the rear of the car on the curb. The officer retrieved and examined the gun. It was made of plastic. He replaced the plastic gun in its door pocket. When Officer Jauregui was standing next to open car door and while he was retrieving and replacing the plastic gun, he could smell a strong odor of marijuana emanating from inside the vehicle. Consequently, Officer Jauregui had appellant, the front right passenger, and a rear passenger alight. On the way to the rear of the car,