In re Michael P. CA3
Opinion
Opinion
DISCUSSION
I. The Probation Condition Is Not Overbroad
The juvenile court imposed the following probation condition at the combined dispositional hearing: “The minor shall not possess any graffiti materials, including, but not limited to, spray paint cans, marker pens, and liquid shoe polish.”
Michael P. contends the inclusion of marker pens is impermissibly overbroad, as he attends school and will likely need to possess such items to pursue his state constitutional right to an education.
We certainly do not intend to get between anyone and their right to an education. “A probation condition should be given „the meaning that would appear to a reasonable, objective reader.‟ ” (People v. Olguin (2008) 45 Cal.4th 375, 382, quoting People v. Bravo (1987) 43 Cal.3d 600, 606.)
A reasonable interpretation of this probation condition is that Michael may possess marker pens as necessary to do his school work, but may not do so to undertake graffiti. Interpreted in this way, the probation condition is not overbroad.
3 II. & III. The Juvenile Court Properly Terminated DEJ, and Its Failure to Consider Michael P.’s Ability to Pay Victim Restitution Was Harmless