Legal Opinion

People v. Matthew A.

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 29, 2008No. B200559PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

FLIER, J.—

SUMMARY

The juvenile court declared appellant Matthew A. a ward of the court after finding that he had committed a first degree burglary. The court placed appellant home on probation, and set a maximum term of confinement of six years.

Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient to support the juvenile court’s finding he had committed burglary. In particular, he argues the evidence did not show he intended to steal at the time he entered the victim’s residence. Appellant also contends the court erred by setting a maximum term of confinement.

We strike the maximum term of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. HoltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  2. People v. MontoyaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. People v. CejaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  4. People v. Leanna W.California Court of Appeal · 2004

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. People v. SampleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. People v. P.A.California Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. People v. MoomeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  4. People v. Christopher F.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. People v. A.C.California Court of Appeal · 2014

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API