In re K.C. CA4/3

Filed 6/28/13 In re K.C. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re K.C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE, G047389 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DL043151) v. OPINION K.C.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from orders of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gregory W. Jones, Judge. Affirmed. Paul S. Berger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, William M. Wood,

Ifeolu E. Hassan and Kathryn Kirschbaum, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * * INTRODUCTION The juvenile court found true allegations that K.C., then 16 years old (the minor), committed two counts of attempted robbery. We reject each of the minor‟s claims of error, and affirm the court‟s orders. First, the minor argues there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court‟s true findings. We conclude, however, that there was substantial evidence of the minor‟s specific intent to rob the two victims, and of overt acts in furtherance of that intent. Second, we find no error in the juvenile court‟s admission of evidence that a BB pistol was found in the minor‟s waistband when he was stopped by the police shortly after the attempted robberies. The minor‟s possession of a BB pistol was relevant to the issue of his intent. Finally, the juvenile court‟s reference to an inference of innocence does not show the court violated the minor‟s constitutional rights by ignoring the presumption of innocence or shifting the burden of proof to the minor.

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY About 1:00 a.m. on July 31, 2012, Maria C. was walking home from work; her son, Luis C., was walking his bicycle beside her. Two young men approached Maria and Luis. One of the young men, identified as the minor, was on a bicycle, while the other was on a skateboard. The minor asked Luis if he had a phone, and Luis replied, “no.” The minor then asked, “what is sticking out from your shirt?” Luis responded, “my earphones.” The minor then asked, “so you do have a phone?” Luis replied, “no.