In Re Branden O.

The minor appeals from a dispositional order that followed a contested jurisdictional hearing where the juvenile court found that the minor committed assault with a stun gun, a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 244.5. ) The minor argues on appeal that insufficient evidence supports the jurisdictional finding, because the person he shocked was not immobilized, as set forth in the statute. He also argues that the juvenile court abused its discretion in admitting expert testimony about the stun gun used by the minor. We find no error and affirm.

I.

Factual and Procedural Background

On the afternoon of August 17, 2008, two teenaged boys (Hunter B. and John M.) were playing on the computer at John M.’s Walnut Creek home, when they looked out the window and saw the minor and another boy they did not know reaching into cars parked in neighbors’ driveways. Believing that the boys were trying to steal the cars or something inside them, Hunter B. went outside to confront them. When Hunter B. got close to the minor, the minor “tased” him with a stun gun. Hunter B. testified that he felt a shock. He took “one step back from the shock,” paused for a few seconds, then ran and tackled the…