California Court of Appeal

Juvenile court orders finding that defendant-juvenile committed first degree burglary and declaring him to be a ward of the court are affirmed, where: 1) the juvenile court did not err in admitting expert testimony about a palm print implicating him in the burglary; and 2) there was insufficient evidence to sustain the burglary finding.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/27/2013
• Published 11/27/2013

Judges

• HUMES

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel