In re Danny N.
The juvenile court found true beyond a reasonable doubt the allegations of a petition subsequent (petition) charging Danny N. (the Minor), a ward of the court, with first degree residential burglary under Penal Code sections 459 and 460, subdivision (a). The court ordered the Minor continue as a ward of the court, committed him to juvenile hall for 90 days, and ordered terms and conditions of probation.
The People tried the case on the theory the Minor had aided and abetted the residential burglary. At the close of the Peoples case‑in‑chief, the Minor moved to dismiss under Welfare and Institutions Code section 701.1.[1] The Minor argues that the juvenile court erred by denying the motion because the People failed to prove corpus delicti, and, therefore, his extrajudicial statements were inadmissible as evidence of guilt. Without those statements, the Minor argues, the evidence was insufficient to support the true finding on the petition.
For reasons Court will explain, we conclude the People met their burden of proving corpus delicti. Court therefore affirm the true finding on the allegations of first degree residential burglary in the petition, with the modifications to the terms and conditions of probation requested by the Minor.
Comments on In re Danny N.