Brandão

People v. Brandão

Good Law
148 Cal. Rptr. 3d 426·210 Cal. App. 4th 568
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 24, 2012No. H037871California3,598 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Marquez, J.

Defendant Antonio Brandáo pleaded no contest to possessing methamphetamine, a felony offense. Nothing in the record indicates that defendant has any gang affiliations or other gang-related history, nor did the underlying offense have anything to do with a gang. On appeal, he claims that the trial court erred by imposing a no-gang-contact probation condition on him. We agree. We will modify the probation condition and, with that modification, affirm the judgment.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Defendant pleaded no contest to violating subdivision (a) of Health and Safety Code section 11377 by possessing methamphetamine. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on three years’ formal probation, including a condition that he not knowingly associate with any gang members.

The probation report proposed imposing the following no-gang-contact condition: “Not associate with any individuals you know or are told by the Probation Officer to be gang members, drug users, or [people] on any form of probation or parole supervision.”

The report stated that defendant had never been involved with any criminal street gangs, nor did he have any family members who…

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.