In re Jose P. CA4/3

Filed 12/16/15 In re Jose P. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). The opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 JOSE P., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. _______________________________ G051904

THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. No. DL041220)

Plaintiff and Respondent, OPINION

v.

JOSE P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Fred C. Slaughter, Judge. Affirmed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

Minor Jose P. filed a notice of appeal after the juvenile court terminated his wardship, but declined to seal his juvenile court record. Jose’s appointed counsel filed a brief summarizing the case, but advised this court he found no issues to support an appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Appellate counsel represents in a declaration attached to the opening brief he has thoroughly reviewed the record and he advised Jose he would be filing a brief complying with Wende procedures. He provided Jose with a copy of the brief, and informed Jose he could personally file a supplemental brief raising any issues he thought the court should consider. He also provided Jose with a copy of the appellate record to assist Jose should he wish to file a brief. Counsel does not request to be relieved as counsel, but he informed Jose he had the right to seek his removal and the appointment of new counsel, and counsel would move to withdraw should Jose request that he do so. We gave minor 30 days to file a supplemental written brief on his own behalf, but he has not responded. After conducting an independent review of the record under Wende, we affirm.