The minor appealed from the judgment of extended commitment to CYA pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 1800 on the grounds that the evidence at trial was insufficient to prove he has serious difficulty controlling his dangerous behavior. The appellate court agreed and reversed. The evidence in this case was even weaker than that presented in In re Howard N. The offense, which involved sexual acts with minor girls, were not crimes of compulsion, but of opportunity. The expert testimony was that the minor presented “some risk, moderate at least” to the community if released. The minor’s confinement behavior did not support a finding of present lack of control. The evidence at trial failed to support the requisite finding without a good measure of speculation and conjecture. Since the commitment order was reversed for failure of proof, principles of double jeopardy require that the minor be released from confinement.