With a condition of probation requiring appellant to take medications there must be a medically-informed showing on the record that adherence to a particular medical regimen is reasonably related to the offense or future criminality. Appellant, who had known the victim and her daughter for some time, was convicted of the theft of nearly $10,000 worth of jewelry from the victim’s home. The theft occurred while he was at a party in the victim’s house hosted by the victim’s daughter. According to the probation report, appellant had a long history of mental health issues and was taking prescribed medication. Appellant was granted probation with conditions requiring him to take medications as directed and stay a specified distance from the victim or her daughter. The medication condition was stricken and the stay away order was amended to provide that appellant shall not knowingly come within 100 yards of the protected persons. The court found that adults have a state constitutional privacy right and a fundamental due process freedom to refuse to take antipsychotic medications. Accordingly, with a condition of probation requiring such medication, there must be a strong nexus between the offense and the need for medication and the goals of rehabilitation, and the record must reflect a medically-informed showing as to the need for medication. (Compare In re Luis F. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 176, where Welfare and Institutions Code section 727, subdivision (a) specifically authorizes a juvenile court to make orders for medical treatment of wards.) Here, there was no showing on the record that defendant’s taking of medication was reasonably related to the instant offense or his future rehabilitation. Additionally, the court found that the stay-away condition is authorized by Penal Code section 1203.1, subdivision (j), which provides the court with wide discretion in crafting conditions of probation.