In re Andrew M. CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 16, 2015G050102California1,453 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

INTRODUCTION

After the juvenile court found that Andrew M. had possessed methamphetamine for sale in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11378, the court, inter alia, reimposed probation conditions that it had imposed after sustaining prior juvenile delinquency petitions filed against Andrew. Those conditions included that Andrew not use or possess “any dangerous, illegal or deadly weapons,” and not “initiate contact” with, or “cause to be contacted by” any victims or witnesses “of any offense” alleged against him. Andrew argues both conditions are unconstitutionally vague because they lack a scienter requirement. We modify both conditions to each contain a scienter requirement. We affirm the order as so modified.

BACKGROUND

In March 2014, a notice of hearing on juvenile probation violations was filed in the juvenile court, which alleged Andrew had been previously declared a ward of the Orange County Juvenile Court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602, and had been ordered to comply with certain probation conditions. The notice further stated Andrew failed to comply with the conditions because he was ordered (1) not to have any weapons or knowingly be in the…

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.