People v. O.D.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUMES, J.
O.D. appeals from juvenile court orders finding that he committed first degree burglary and declaring him to be a ward of the court. He argues that the court wrongly admitted expert testimony about a palm print implicating him in the burglary and that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the burglary finding. We disagree and affirm.
I
Factual and Procedural Background
On October 30, 2009, Marlene R. left her Antioch house at 7:30 a.m. after making sure the doors and windows were locked. When she returned at 3:30 that afternoon, she found “mail strewn about in the entryway…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- People v. DoolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- People v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- People v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. Daveggio & MichaudCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- People v. RivasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- People v. AzconaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- People v. AzconaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.