California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. R.V. (In re R.V.), 187 Cal.Rptr.3d 882, 349 P.3d 68, 61 Cal.4th 181 (Cal. 2015):
his conclusion. (People v. Samuel, supra, 29 Cal.3d at p. 498, 174 Cal.Rptr. 684, 629 P.2d 485.) In a case such as this one, therefore, the inquiry on appeal is whether the weight and character of the evidence of incompetency was such that the juvenile court could not reasonably reject it. (See Samuel, supra, at pp. 498506, 174 Cal.Rptr. 684, 629 P.2d 485 [examining the facts on which the defense experts relied and the reasoning by which they arrived at their opinions to conclude that the jury could not reasonably have rejected the defense evidence of incompetence].)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.