People v. Luna CA6

DISCUSSION

1. Standard of Review “A Court of Appeal may review the constitutionality of a probation condition, even when it has not been challenged in the trial court, if the question can be resolved as a matter of law without reference to the sentencing record. (In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 888-889 (Sheena K.).) Our review of such a question is de novo.” (People v. Pirali (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1341, 1345.) 2. Knowledge Requirement in Conditions Nos. 15 and 163 Condition No. 15 states: “Have no direct or indirect contact with the victims, including contact by telephone, writing, computer, or through another person.” Condition No. 16 states: “Stay away at least 100 yards from the victim, the victim’s residence, the victim’s place of employment, school they attend, and any vehicle the victim is in.” Defendant argues these conditions should be modified to include a knowledge requirement, and the People agree. “[T]he underpinning of a vagueness challenge is the due process concept of ‘fair warning.’ ” (Sheena K., supra, 40 Cal.4th at p. 890.) “A probation condition ‘must be sufficiently precise for the probationer to know what is required of him, and for the court to…