In re Gilbert T.
Minors claim there was no evidence when the primary activities had occurred conflicts with the record. His reliance on People v. Perez (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 151 is ill-founded because the expert there never testified about the gangs primary activities. (Id. at p. 160.) The same was true in In re Alexander L. (Apr. 9, 2007 G036595) Cal.App.4th [2007 WL 1041431], where the expert never specifically testified about the primary activities of the gang. He merely stated he kn[e]w that the gang had been involved in certain crimes. . . . He did not directly testify that criminal activities constituted [the gangs] primary activities. (Id. at p. __ [p. *3].) The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on In re Gilbert T.