Probation condition prohibiting minor from engaging in unconsented sexual touching is not unconstitutionally vague. A juvenile court found that K.C. committed a felony sex offense and sustained a juvenile delinquency petition. As part of the disposition, the court imposed the following probation condition: “you must not engage in any unconsented sexual touching of any person.” On appeal, K.C. argued that the probation condition was unconstitutionally vague. Held: Affirmed. The Court of Appeal concluded the condition is sufficiently definite to preclude constitutional infirmity. “A reasonable person would interpret this provision to proscribe unconsented touching of another person that involves any sexual connotation, either due to the parts of the body involved or K.C.’s intent in touching the person. The term ‘unconsented’ provides guidance and permits K.C. to avoid violating the condition in those instances where he has that person’s consent.”
Case Summaries
