In re Daniel D. CA2/4

Filed 10/17/14 In re Daniel D. CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

In re DANIEL D., a Person Coming B249575 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GJ29641)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

DANIEL D.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert Leventer, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed. Adrian K. Panton, 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, James William Bilderback II and Tannaz Kouhpainezhad, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________________________________

INTRODUCTION Daniel D., a minor, appeals from an order adjudicating him a ward of the 1 juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. He contends there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court’s finding that he committed second degree robbery against his father, Jon D. Finding no error, we affirm.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY In a section 602 petition filed on February 20, 2013, appellant was charged with second degree robbery of Jon D. (Pen. Code, § 211). After a two-day adjudication hearing, the allegations of the petition were found to be true. On May 2, 2013, the disposition hearing was held. Appellant was declared a ward of the court with a finding that the second degree robbery offense was a felony. The aggregated maximum term of physical confinement was determined by the court to be six years and four months. Appellant was credited with 298 days of predisposition custody. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the dispositional order.