In re A.L.
The juvenile court declared appellant A.L. a ward of the court (§ 602)[1] based upon its finding that A.L. had committed animal cruelty (Pen. Code, § 597, subd. (a)) (hereafter section 597, subd. (a)) and placed him on home probation.
A.L.'s appeal raises two contentions. The first is that the evidence is insufficient to support the trial court's finding that he committed animal cruelty. The second is that the evidence is insufficient to support the trial court's finding that at the time of the incident when he was 13 years and 10 months old, he understood the wrongfulness of his conduct. Court are not persuaded by either contention and therefore affirm the judgment (order of wardship).
Comments on In re A.L.