No constitutional violation in prohibiting sex offender parolee from: (1) using a computer; (2) associating with known sex offenders; and (3) possessing sexually stimulating devices. Computer restriction was not overbroad where defendant’s crimes involved a computer and there was an exception for approved employment activities, the sex offender association was not vague or overbroad, and the sex device ban was not unduly burdensome on defendant’s right to privacy considering the state’s interest in preventing a new offense.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A168485.PDF