IN RE: D.W. (2011)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

OPINION

Appellant, D.W., appeals from a judgment entered after he admitted petition allegations (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 602) charging him with sexual penetration of a minor (Pen.Code, § 289, subd. (h)).  Following independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On January 12, 2010, a high school student in Fresno reported to a teacher that she had been raped.   During an interview with a police officer, the victim stated that on November 30, 2009, she was walking home from school when appellant called her on the phone.   The victim did not answer and a few minutes later appellant came up behind her and began teasing her because she did not answer the phone.   The two walked together until they reached a street corner and said goodbye.   However, when appellant yelled out to the victim, “ ‘[c]ome here,’ ” the victim complied.   Appellant then grabbed her by the arm, took her behind some shrubs, and began kissing her on the face.   When he began undressing her, however, she told him to stop and attempted to push him away.   Eventually, she wound up on the ground where appellant raped and digitally penetrated her despite her continued protests and attempts to get him off of her.   When a car drove by, appellant stopped the assault and allowed the victim to leave.   After the incident, appellant sent the victim several text messages acknowledging he assaulted her and apologizing.

During a post arrest interview, appellant admitted only to attempting to have intercourse with the victim.

On June 4, 2010, the district attorney filed a juvenile wardship petition charging appellant with forcible rape (count 1/Pen.Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2)) and sexual penetration of a minor (count 2).

On October 14, 2010, appellant admitted the sexual penetration offense in exchange for the dismissal of the remaining count.

On December 3, 2010, the court set appellant's maximum term of confinement at three years and committed him to the Juvenile Justice Campus for 180 days.

Appellant's appellate counsel has filed a brief which summarizes the facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record.  (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)   Appellant has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.

Following an independent review of the record, we find that no reasonably arguable factual or legal issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.