Skip to content
Name: In re K.C.
Case #: B319819
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 01/23/2023

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…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Ricardo P.
Case #: S230923
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 08/15/2019

Opinion by Justice Liu (joined by Justices Cuéllar, Kruger, and Groban). Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye filed a concurring and dissenting opinion, in which Justices Chin and Corrigan concurred.
Minor's electronics search condition of probation was not reasonably related to future criminality under People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481, where the burden imposed on the minor's privacy was substantially disproportionate to the condition's goal of monitoring and deterring drug use. Ricardo P., a juvenile, was placed on probation after admitting two counts of felony burglary. The juvenile court imposed an electronics search condition of probation in order to monitor…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.C.
Case #: B292149
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 07/09/2019

A juvenile ward's statements to a counselor, who was assigned to the minor and his family as part of his probation to assess their need for mental health services, did not fall within the psychotherapist-patient privilege. After sustaining a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition, the juvenile court placed A.C. home on probation. Burgos, an in-home counselor, was assigned to A.C.'s family. She assessed the needs of the family and assisted the family and A.C. with receiving mental health services. She did not provide one-on-one therapy sessions. Prior to sessions with minors, she advises them that their statements…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.A.
Case #: B289821
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 12/20/2018

Minor's First Amendment rights were not violated by a probation condition prohibiting him from posting on social media about his case. During juvenile court proceedings against A.A., the court admonished him for posting a photo of his court subpoena with a caption describing himself as a 16-year-old felon and a subsequent video of A.A. dancing in front of the courthouse. The court sustained a petition alleging A.A. committed battery with serious bodily injury and placed him on probation with a condition prohibiting him from discussing his case on social media. On appeal, A.A. challenged the probation condition as vague and…

View Full Summary
Name: In re L.O.
Case #: A151967
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 09/26/2018

Preventing minor ward's access to social media websites as a condition of probation violates the First Amendment and requires modification of the term. The minor was granted probation following the juvenile court's true finding he committed misdemeanor battery and had four prior offenses. The terms of his probation subjected him to searches of his electronic devices and barred him from using social networking websites. On appeal, the minor challenged the probation conditions as unconstitutional. Held: Probation term prohibiting access to social media websites modified. When the juvenile court places a minor on probation it may impose reasonable conditions to the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re D.B.
Case #: A149815
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 06/04/2018

Minor's challenge to juvenile court's recommendations for payment of legal services rejected where the record does not reflect orders for payment and, based on a 2017 change in the law, no such orders may issue in the future. D.B. admitted an allegation in a juvenile delinquency petition that he brought a knife to school (Pen. Code, § 626.10, subd. (a)). The juvenile court declared D.B. a ward and placed him on probation. The prosecution filed subsequent petitions for drug use and the minor was continued a ward. On appeal he challenged two dispositional orders that included recommendations that appeared to…

View Full Summary
Name: In re I.V.
Case #: D070611
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 04/28/2017

Juvenile court made necessary findings as to minor's special education needs (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.651(b)(2) when it imposed probation condition ordering him to enroll in a day center program instead of high school. The juvenile court adjudged 15-year-old I.V. a ward for vandalizing his house during an argument with his mom. He was placed on probation with a number of conditions, including one requiring him to attend the Reflections Day Center Program instead of high school. I.V. objected to the condition, arguing the court failed to make necessary findings as to special educational needs before ordering him…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.F.
Case #: D068971
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 01/12/2017

Minor's probation condition was unconstitutionally overbroad where it forbid use of all electronic devices, including a basic phone. M.F., a minor, was detained after he gave a teacher a letter threatening gun violence against the teacher. Police found gun paraphernalia and ammunition in M.F.'s bedroom as well as plans for future attacks. M.F. admitted allegations that he made criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422), threatened a public employee (Pen. Code, § 71), and possessed ammunition (Pen. Code, § 29650). M.F. was declared a ward of the court and the juvenile court imposed a probation condition prohibiting…

View Full Summary
Name: In re D.H.
Case #: A147361
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/26/2016

Probation term prohibiting minor who committed misdemeanor indecent exposure from viewing "pornography" is void for vagueness. The minor admitted a misdemeanor charge of indecent exposure, was declared a ward of the court, and placed on probation. On appeal he challenged several of his probation terms including one that prohibited him from viewing "pornography." Held: Remanded for modification of term. When a juvenile court places a minor on probation it has broad discretion to impose reasonable conditions that will advance the reformation and rehabilitation of the ward (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730, subd. (b)). The condition must be sufficiently precise…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.G.
Case #: A147463
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 09/06/2016

In delinquency case, unpaid restitution debts do not foreclose a finding of satisfactory completion of probation. In 2011, when J.G. was 17, he committed a residential burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 460, subd. (a)) and was adjudged a ward of the court. He was ordered to pay victim restitution. J.G. satisfactorily completed his court-ordered time at a youth rehabilitation center, complied with the terms of his probation, and had no new convictions. When J.G. was 18 years old, the court ordered his parole "terminated successfully" and continued his wardship. At a review hearing in January 2016, probation asked for termination…

View Full Summary