The minor moved to modify his commitment to the California Youth Authority under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 778 and 779. The juvenile court denied the motion based on concern that it would lose jurisdiction over appellant were it to modify his CYA commitment. On appeal, the minor claimed that the juvenile court’s ruling was an abuse of discretion because the court would not have lost jurisdiction by granting the motion, and in any event, loss of jurisdiction was an improper basis for denying the motion. The appellate court agreed and reversed, noting that juvenile delinquency laws are designed to give the juvenile court great latitude in fashioning orders to rehabilitate juveniles. The court remanded for consideration of the minor’s motion to modify his commitment.