People v. D.F. CA1/4
Filed 2/28/22 P. v. D.F. CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A162417 v. D.F., (Contra Costa County Superior Court No. J15- Defendant and 00199) Appellant.
After numerous sustained juvenile petitions, probation violations, and adult arrests, the juvenile court terminated defendant D.F.’s status as a non-minor dependent and set aside its placement order. Counsel for D.F. filed an opening brief asking that this court conduct an independent review of the record for arguable issues—i.e., those that are not frivolous, pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Counsel also informed D.F. that he had the right to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, but he declined to do so. Because this appeal is not a first appeal from a criminal conviction, and because defendant has failed to file a supplemental brief requesting our independent review of any issues, we will dismiss the appeal.
1
BACKGROUND D.F.’s first sustained juvenile petition was on August 5, 2016, shortly after his fifteenth birthday. He was declared a ward of the court and placed on home supervision. Within four months, he had admitted two violations of the conditions of his probation, one for misdemeanor battery and another for removing his ankle monitor and leaving home. In 2017, new supplemental petitions and probation violations were sustained based on incidents involving shoplifting, assault, and violating his curfew. After an additional probation violation in 2018, D.F. was placed out of his mother’s home at the Boys Republic facility on October 30, 2018. In early May 2019, a few weeks before his 18th birthday, D.F. was involved in multiple incidents relating to his placement at Boys Republic, including verbal and physical altercations with peers and staff, as well as damaging a Boys Republic rented car. Boys Republic staff requested emergency removal of D.F. from the facility, and the probation department filed a notice of violation alleging that D.F. had violated the conditions of his probation. D.F. admitted a probation violation on May 20, 2019; he was released to his mother’s custody, but she had repeatedly stated she did not want to house him. On June 3, 2019, a few days after D.F.’s 18th birthday, the probation department recommended that D.F. be adjudged a non- minor dependent (NMD) and continued as a ward of the juvenile court, and the court adopted that recommendation. D.F. moved
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)