In re A.P. CA4/2

I.

FACTS

A.P. was first declared a ward of the court in 2018 after admitting to attempted

robbery and possession of a firearm by a minor. (Penal Code, §§ 664/211, 29610.) The

court placed him on probation for these offenses. In 2019, A.P. admitted to residential

burglary. (Penal Code, § 459.) The court continued A.P. on probation but with

additional terms.

On June 5, 2020, A.P. admitted to assault. (Penal Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4).) On

June 19, 2020, the court committed A.P. to the Division of Juvenile Justice Facilities.

Nearly two years later, on March 9, 2022, the court released A.P. from the

Division of Juvenile Justice Facilities and placed him on probation. The court imposed

the same terms and conditions of probation as it did the last time it placed A.P. on

probation, with two additional terms. One of these additional terms required A.P. to

submit to continuous electronic GPS monitoring as directed by the probation officer.

A.P. objected to this term, arguing it was vague, overbroad , and otherwise in violation of

People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436; Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.

2 the holding in People v. Lent (presumably People v. Lent…