People v. Hill CA3

FACTS

After a night of drinking and partying on October 15, 2012, defendants were involved in the beating of the victim. The victim sustained serious injuries. Defendants were released on bail after their arrests and failed to appear at a court hearing. Bench warrants were issued and defendants were located in Michigan.

DISCUSSION

I Prior to sentencing, the probation officer recommended probation for defendants subject to certain terms and conditions including probation condition number 5 which provides: “That [her/his] place of employment and residence must meet with the approval of the Probation Officer.” The court so ordered at sentencing. Defendants contend that the condition is constitutionally overbroad, violating their rights to travel, association, and employment.1 The People concede that condition number 5 is constitutionally overbroad. Based on People v. Bauer (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 937, 944 (Bauer), People v. Burden (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 1277, 1279- 1281, and People v. O’Neil (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1351, 1358-1359, we agree.

1 Defendant Bledsoe also contends the probation condition is unconstitutional as applied but since he did not object on this ground at…