In re D.P. CA3

DISCUSSION

Minor contends the People did not present substantial evidence to support his conviction for possessing a concealable firearm. Specifically, he contends there was insufficient evidence to prove he had the right to control the gun found on the front passenger seat. We disagree. We review the whole record in the light most favorable to the juvenile court’s finding to determine if it discloses substantial evidence such that a reasonable trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt the minor committed the alleged offenses. (In re Jose R. (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 269, 275.) We presume the existence of every fact the judge could reasonably deduce from the evidence and indulge in all reasonable inferences in support of the finding. (Ibid.) The juvenile court sustained the allegation that minor possessed a concealable firearm based on the doctrine of constructive possession. “To establish constructive possession, the prosecution must prove a defendant knowingly exercised a right to

3 control the prohibited item, either directly or through another person. (People v. Pena (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 1078, 1083-1084; People v. Mejia (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 1269, 1272 [defendant need…