In re Brendon A. CA4/1

DISCUSSION

A. Sufficient Evidence Supports the Juvenile Court's Findings

Brendon contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain the juvenile court's

findings that he committed the battery and assaults alleged against him. Specifically, he

3 argues the People's aiding and abetting theory failed because the prosecutor presented no

evidence that Brendon knew of the shooter's unlawful purpose or specifically intended to

facilitate the shooter's commission of the offenses. For reasons we shall explain, we

disagree.

1. Standard of Review

" 'The standard of proof in juvenile proceedings involving criminal acts is the same

as the standard in adult criminal trials.' " (In re Cesar V. (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 989,

994.) When considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we review the

entire record to determine whether it contains substantial evidence, i.e., evidence that is

reasonable, credible, and of solid value, from which a reasonable trier of fact could find

the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. (Jackson v. Virginia

(1979) 443 U.S. 307, 319; People v. Foster (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1301, 1348;…