In re Miguel D. CA4/1

Filed 5/14/26 In re Miguel D. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In re Miguel D. a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

D086101 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. J245248) v. MIGUEL D., Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from findings and an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Robert J. Trentacosta, Judge. Affirmed.

Jake E. Stanton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In a petition filed in the juvenile court, Miguel D. (Minor) was alleged to have committed assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen.

Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(4)). Following an evidentiary hearing, the court found the allegation of assault true. The court also found the offense was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)).

After a disposition hearing, Minor was adjudged a ward of the court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 and was committed to Urban Camp for a period not to exceed 130 days.

Minor filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellate counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 439 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende.

We offered Minor the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.

FACTS The evidence shows Minor participated in assaultive behavior in concert with several members of a street gang. Minor and his companions confronted another young man who identified with a different street gang.

The altercation took place on and around the Blue Line trolley at the Iris Avenue station in the South Bay area of San Diego County.

DISCUSSION As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in its review and incompliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) counsel has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Whether there was sufficient

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. evidence presented to support the true finding on the allegation that Minor committed the offense for the benefit of a criminal street gang.

We have independently reviewed the record for error as required by Wende and Anders. We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Minor in this appeal.

DISPOSITION The true findings and the dispositional order on the petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 are affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J.* WE CONCUR:

KELETY, Acting P. J.

CASTILLO, J.

* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.