In Re Eddie M.

Proposition 21 (the Gang Violence and Juvenile Crime Prevention Act of 1998), approved by the voters at the March 7, 2000 primary election, effected a number of significant changes to juvenile court law, including amendments to Welfare and Institutions Code section 777, [1] which governs modification of the placement of a ward of the court based upon subsequent acts of misconduct. Prior to amendment by Proposition 21, section 777 provided for the filing of a supplemental petition requesting the modification of a previous disposition order by reason of additional misconduct that either constituted a crime or violated a condition of probation that did not amount to a crime. The alleged misconduct had to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. ( In re Arthur N. (1976) 16 Cal.3d 226, 235-241 , 127 Cal.Rptr. 641 , 545 P.2d 1345 ( Arthur N. ); In re Marcus A. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 423, 427 , 109 Cal.Rptr.2d 919 ; In re Melvin J. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 742, 744, 758-759 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 917 .)

Amended section 777 now provides, "The facts alleged in the notice shall be established by a preponderance of the evidence at a hearing to change, modify, or set aside a previous order.…