People v. Paez CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 9, 2026A172714California3,173 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fujisaki, J.

Filed 3/9/26 P. v. Paez CA1/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

A172714

v. JUAN PAEZ, (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. 21-CR-006121) Defendant and Appellant.

Juan Paez pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor count of annoying or molesting a child, and a felony count of dissuading a witness. The trial court placed Paez on two years of formal felony probation with various conditions, including (1) his consent to searches by law enforcement and probation officers of his electronic devices at any time with or without a warrant, and (2) his mandatory participation in a sex offender treatment program for two years. Paez contends, and we agree, that the electronics search condition is invalid under…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.