In re D.R. CA2/6

Opinion

Filed 9/2/26 In re D.R. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

In re D.R., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B350556 Under the Juvenile Court Law. Super. Ct. No. EL1293B (Los Angeles County)

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D.R., Defendant and Appellant.

D.R. appeals after the juvenile court found he committed assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) with a great bodily injury enhancement (id., § 12022.7, subd. (a)) and declared him a ward of the court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. In February 2025, A.S. was attending a protest in front of Los Angeles City Hall. A.S. knew appellant from “past beef.” A.S. ran toward appellant because he wanted to fight him. A.S. pushed the person standing next to appellant to the ground. After pushing that person, A.S. approached appellant. Appellant took out a knife, and A.S. started running. Appellant swung at A.S. with the knife. A.S. was attacked by multiple other people. He extricated himself and ran. A.S. felt a burning sensation on his back, and people told him he was bleeding. An ambulance arrived and took A.S. to the hospital. One of A.S.’s kidneys was damaged and surgically removed. He also sustained intestinal damage. The court dismissed the attempted murder count. It found true the assault with a deadly weapon count and the great bodily injury enhancement. Appellant admitted a battery with serious bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (d)) on a separate petition. The court placed appellant in the care, custody, and control of probation for a camp term of five to seven months. The court set the maximum confinement time at eight years but later amended the number to seven years following a letter from appellate counsel. We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On June 5, 2026, we sent a letter advising appellant that he had 30 days to submit any grounds for appeal, contentions, or arguments he wished us to consider. We have received no such submission from appellant. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that counsel has fully complied with their responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed.

2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

CODY, P. J.

We concur:

YEGAN, J.

BALTODANO, J.

3 Robert J. Totten, Judge Superior Court County of Los Angeles ______________________________ Kristen Owen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.