Juvenile court did not err when it sustained petition based solely on the testimony of an accomplice. During proceedings on a subsequent petition alleging burglary and vandalism, the sole evidence against the minor was the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. The juvenile court denied the defense motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence because of the opinion in In re Mitchell P. (1978) 22 Cal.3d 946 [holding that Penal Code section 1111 does not apply to juvenile court proceedings]. The appellate court affirmed the jurisdictional order, but held that in the thirty years since Mitchell P., there has been a transformation of juvenile court law, purpose, and consequences, which undermines its rationale. Mitchell P. warrants reevaluation.