In re Anthony R.
After admitting to petty theft (Pen. Code, 484, subd. (a)),[1]being convicted of resisting arrest ( 148, subd. (a)(1)) and auto vandalism of at least $400 on behalf of a street gang ( 594, subd. (a) & (b)(1), 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)), appellant Anthony R. was ordered into electronically monitored home confinement, subject to standard probationary terms. Appellant was 15 years old at the time of the offense.
Appellant now claims that (1) insufficient evidence supports his conviction for causing at least $400 damage to both cars, (2) two misdemeanor vandalism offenses should have been charged as opposed to a single felony, and (3) reversal of the felony vandalism conviction requires reversal of the gang enhancement. For the following reasons, Court affirm.
Comments on In re Anthony R.