legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re A.J. CA5
In February 2017, appellant was declared a ward of the juvenile court after the court found true that he had committed (1) residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 459 ); (2) robbery (§ 211); (3) assault with a deadly weapon. Appellant was ordered to serve 80 hours community service, along with other terms and conditions.
Prior to the juvenile proceeding, appellant confessed to the commission of these crimes to a police officer while undergoing a custodial interrogation. He argues that the juvenile court prejudicially erred in allowing admission of his statements, which he contends were obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda). He further asserts that the court misapplied the presumption of his incapacity to commit at least some of the charged crimes. Finally, he contends substantial evidence does not support the court’s implied finding of his capacity. We affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale