In re D.R. CA5

California Court of Appeal Jan 26, 2021 No. F081333Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that substantial evidence supported the juvenile court's finding that the minor was a principal in the robbery, as the victim identified the minor shortly after the incident and the minor was found in possession of stolen items.

Issues

Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the juvenile court's finding that the minor committed robbery.
Whether the prosecution was required to prove the elements of aiding and abetting.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Based on the entire record, and in the light most favorable to the disposition order, substantial evidence supported the juvenile court’s conclusion that the minor was one of the three individuals who committed the robbery.”

“Because the minor was not prosecuted as an aider and abettor and was not found to have aided and abetted, no proof of elements of aiding and abetting was required.”

Filed 1/26/21 In re D.R. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

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

THE PEOPLE, F081333

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 17CEJ600163-3, FJ56516) v.

D.R., OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Mary Dolas, Judge.† Arthur L. Bowie, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Lewis A. Martinez and William K. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* Before Franson, Acting P.J., Meehan, J. and DeSantos, J. † The jurisdictional hearing was held in Los Angeles County before Commissioner Robert Leventer. The dispositional hearing was held in Fresno County before Judge Dolas.

-ooOoo- Minor, D.R., appeals from a disposition order adjudging him a ward of the juvenile court, placing him on probation, and committing him to the New Horizons program based upon the true finding that the minor committed robbery. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602.) He contends that there was insufficient evidence for the juvenile court to have found true the robbery allegation against him. The People disagree. We affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On May 24, 2019,1 the Los Angeles County District Attorney filed a wardship petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602, subd. (a)), alleging the minor committed second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211;2 count 1). On June 25, the Los Angeles County Juvenile Court found the petition true and concluded the offense was a felony. The minor therefore fell within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. On the same date, the Los Angeles County Juvenile Court initiated a transfer of the matter to the Fresno County Juvenile Court for disposition. On July 2, the Fresno County Juvenile Court accepted transfer of the matter. On July 17, the Fresno County Juvenile Court ordered that the minor remain3 a ward of the juvenile court and committed him to the custody of the New Horizons program for 365 days. On August 20, the minor filed a notice of appeal.

In re D.R. CA5

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, F081333

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief