In Re Victor L.

People v. Victor L.

Bad Law
106 Cal. Rptr. 3d 584·182 Cal. App. 4th 902·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 312
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 9, 2010A123649California11,329 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richman, J.

This case exemplifies a growing trend among juvenile delinquents placed on probation: challenging conditions of probation in the appellate courts without having objected to the same conditions at the time they were imposed. This approach has perhaps been inspired by In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 889-890 [ 55 Cal.Rptr.3d 716 , 153 P.3d 282 ], in which the Supreme Court acknowledged the viability of such challenges, so long as they present pure questions of law based solely on facial constitutional grounds and do not require a review of the sentencing record, and are easily remediable on appeal.

We address in this case six conditions of juvenile probation contained on preprinted forms designed for use with juvenile probationers who are gang members or at risk for gang membership. The conditions in question are wide-ranging in content, including restrictions on association with disapproved individuals, being in the presence of dangerous or deadly weapons, being in areas of “gang-related activity,” possession of cell phones and other wireless communication devices, use of computers and the Internet, and the future acquisition of tattoos. They are challenged on…

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.