People v. P.O.
246 Cal. App. 4th 288
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- P.O. was 17 when observed intoxicated at school; hashish oil used and 11 Xanax tablets found.
- A petition under Welfare and Institutions Code §602(a) alleged a misdemeanor; P.O. admitted to a misdemeanor public intoxication.
- At dispositional hearing, the court declared ward and placed on probation with several conditions, three of which are challenged.
- The electronics search condition authorized warrantless searches of electronics including passwords for any time of day.
- Two other challenged conditions required good behavior at school/work and good citizenship, later found to be impermissibly vague; the court imposed additional standard conditions.
- The court modified the electronics condition to limit searches to media reasonably likely to reveal drug-related behavior and clarified password disclosure; it struck the vague good-behavior language and left room for substitute precise terms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether electronics search condition complies with Lent | P.O. contends no relation to his crime and overly broad | People argues third prong satisfied; tailored to supervision | Condition valid under Lent but overbroad and must be narrowed |
| Whether electronics search condition is unconstitutionally overbroad | Condition invades privacy by permitting broad searches of phones and accounts | Condition supports rehabilitation and monitoring | Overbroad; must limit searches to media likely to reveal drug activity and limit password scope |
| Whether good-behavior conditions are unconstitutionally vague | Language too vague to provide notice | Court can modify to be clearer | Vague; struck and remanded for clearer conditions |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Olguin, 45 Cal.4th 375 (Cal. 2008) (probation conditions must be reasonable and tailored to rehabilitation; third prong related to future criminality)
- In re Erica R., 240 Cal.App.4th 907 (Cal. App. 2015) (electronics searches must be narrowly tailored to purpose)
- In re A.S., 245 Cal.App.4th 758 (Cal. App. 2016) (electronics search condition not always overbroad depending on facts)
- In re Mark C., 244 Cal.App.4th 520 (Cal. App. 2016) (held third prong not satisfied; distinguishable from Olguin and trial context)
- In re Binh L., 5 Cal.App.4th 194 (Cal. App. 1992) (juvenile search conditions require tailoring to circumstantial needs)
- In re Sheena K., 40 Cal.4th 875 (Cal. 2007) (probation conditions must be precise to provide fair warning)
- People v. Lent, 15 Cal.3d 481 (Cal. 1975) (three-prong test for probation conditions; related to crime, conduct, and future criminality)