Skip to content
Name: In re A.M.
Case #: A136288
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 10/30/2013
Summary

The juvenile court has authority to impose GPS monitoring as a condition of probation for a truant minor. Minor, a habitual truant under Welfare and Institutions Code section 601, subdivision (b), was adjudged a ward of the court and placed in the care and custody of her mother. Following continued truancies, the court placed minor on GPS monitoring. On appeal, minor argued the GPS monitoring was an invalid condition of probation for a truancy wardship. Affirmed. Under Welfare and Institutions Code section 727, subdivision (a)(1), “the court may make any reasonable orders for the care, supervision, [and] conduct . . .” of a minor described as a person by section 601 or 602. Other provisions of juvenile law specify certain conditions of probation but none expressly authorize GPS monitoring of a section 601 ward. Section 729.2 provides that if minor is not removed from the parent’s physical custody, the court “shall” require minor to attend school regularly and observe a curfew. Because a juvenile court is authorized to make reasonable orders, it is not limited to only imposing conditions of probation that are expressly provided by statute. GPS monitoring may be an appropriate condition of probation for a section 601 ward in certain circumstances (e.g. when a ward continues a pattern of truancy and violates curfew) because it assists the court in monitoring a minor’s compliance with a curfew. The Court of Appeal did not determine whether it was appropriate to place the minor in this case on GPS monitoring.