In re D.M. CA2/6
D.M., a minor, appeals from an order adjudicating him a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) after the juvenile court found true the allegation that D.M. possessed a weapon on school grounds (Pen. Code, § 626.10). The court placed him home on probation.
D.M. contends the juvenile court erred in granting a motion to amend the petition to change the description of the weapon he possessed from “taser” to “taser/stun gun” because (1) the amendment violated his due process right to adequate notice, and (2) there was insufficient evidence that he possessed a stun gun. We affirm.
Comments on In re D.M. CA2/6