People v. A.S. (In re A.S.)
200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 100
| Cal. Ct. App. 1st | 2016Background
- 17-year-old A.S. admitted assault on her mother and was made a ward of the juvenile court; disposition included probation with conditions.
- Probation conditions challenged: (1) warrantless searches of her electronic devices and passwords (electronic search condition); (2) prohibition on being on any school campus/grounds unless enrolled, accompanied, or authorized (school grounds condition).
- Record showed substantial concerns: diagnosed mental illness, drug use, unstable family relationships, association with a 23‑year‑old, prolonged truancy, and professionals recommending intensive supervision.
- Juvenile court imposed the electronic search condition for close supervision and denied a motion to strike; it also imposed the school‑grounds restriction.
- Appellant challenged the electronic search condition as unreasonable/overbroad and violative of third‑party privacy (Pen. Code § 632); she challenged the school condition as unconstitutionally vague without a knowledge requirement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of electronic search condition under Lent (reasonable relation to future criminality) | Condition is not reasonably related to the assault adjudication and is overly intrusive | Electronic access is essential to monitor appellant given her mental‑health, drug, safety, and association risks; it facilitates supervision and prevents future misconduct | Upheld: on these facts the condition is reasonably related to preventing future criminality and facilitating supervision (Lent satisfied) |
| Overbreadth / First Amendment intrusion from broad password/device search | Clause is overbroad (sweeps private accounts, banking, health, educational data) and risks abuse by probation officers | Broad supervision is justified by unique, severe combination of appellant's risks; concerns are speculative and can be addressed by motion to modify | Rejected: not unconstitutionally overbroad on this record; narrower tailoring unnecessary given intensity of supervision required |
| Penal Code § 632 / third‑party privacy | Condition may permit unlawful eavesdropping/recording of confidential communications of third parties | Claim forfeited (not raised below) and appellant lacks standing to assert third‑party privacy rights | Rejected: forfeited and appellant lacks standing to assert third‑party § 632 interests |
| Vagueness of school grounds condition | Condition is vague because it lacks a knowledge scienter and could penalize inadvertent presence on indistinct school property | Condition is needed to control unauthorized school presence; no explicit contest to adding scienter raised below | Modified: school‑grounds condition must include a knowledge requirement (minor must knowingly be on campus/grounds) |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lent, 15 Cal.3d 481 (1975) (three‑part test for validity of probation conditions)
- In re Sheena K., 40 Cal.4th 875 (2007) (probation conditions limiting constitutional rights must be precisely tailored; vagueness/scienter discussion)
- People v. Olguin, 45 Cal.4th 375 (2008) (conditions facilitating effective supervision can be reasonably related to deterrence of future criminality)
- People v. Ebertowski, 228 Cal.App.4th 1170 (2014) (upholding password/device search where monitoring gang activity and associations justified condition)
- In re Erica R., 240 Cal.App.4th 907 (2015) (striking an electronic search condition under differing facts; court emphasized narrow holding)
- In re J.B., 242 Cal.App.4th 749 (2015) (declining electronic search clause where justification was only general oversight)
- In re Kevin F., 239 Cal.App.4th 351 (2015) (probation condition prohibiting weapons required a knowledge element to avoid vagueness)