Skip to content
Name: People v. Ponce
Case #: B209918
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 03/25/2009

A three-year protective order for the victim of a robbery was unsupported by a showing of necessity and unauthorized. At appellant’s sentencing hearing following a plea to robbery for the benefit of a street gang, the court issued a three-year protective order for the victim of the robbery at the prosecutor’s request, without explanation. On appeal, Ponce contended that the three-year protective order was not authorized by Penal Code section 136.2. The appellate court agreed and ordered the protective order stricken. Section 136.2 authorizes a protective order for a witness in a criminal case during the pendency of the trial where there is a good cause belief that intimidation has or will occur. There was no evidence of intimidation, and the prosecutor made no offer of proof to justify the need for the order. There was nothing in the record to show that the victim ever requested the prosecutor to seek the order. Further, section 136.2 protective orders are operative only during the pendency of the criminal proceedings, so the three-year order was unauthorized.