For defendant convicted of carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle, electronics search term was invalid under People v. Lent because it was not related to defendant’s offense and was not reasonably related to preventing future criminality. Bryant was convicted of possessing a concealed gun in a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 25400, subd. (a)(1)) and having a loaded gun not registered to him (Pen. Code, § 25400, subds. (a), (c)(6)). At sentencing the court imposed a split, two year jail term, with the concluding 365 days on mandatory supervision. Over defense objection, the court imposed a supervision condition requiring Bryant to submit his electronic devices to searches of text messages, emails, and photos. He challenged the search term on appeal. Held: Search term stricken. Trial courts generally have broad discretion in fashioning the conditions of supervised release in order to foster rehabilitation while at the same time protecting public safety. A mandatory supervision term will not be held invalid unless it “(1) has no relationship to the crime of which the defendant was convicted, (2) relates to conduct which is not itself criminal, and (3) requires or forbids conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality.” (People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481.) The search term here has no relationship to Bryant’s offense and the use of electronic devices is not itself criminal. The condition implicates Bryant’s constitutional rights to privacy and against illegal searches. The record reflects no connection between Bryant’s use of electronic devices and his criminality, past or future. Nor is there any evidence the term will aid in his rehabilitation. Therefore the term is invalid under Lent.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B271300.PDF