Opinion
F042438.
10-8-2003
In re ZENNETTA W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ZENNETTA W., Defendant and Appellant.
Carol A. Koenig, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, and Wanda Hill Rouzan, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
THE COURT
The court readjudged appellant, Zennetta W., a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 602) after she admitted allegations charging her with misdemeanor possession of a stolen vehicle and resisting arrest (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1)). On January 22, 2003, the court set Zennettas maximum term of confinement at four years and committed her to the Madera Camp Respect Boot Camp Program. On appeal, Zennetta contends that one of her conditions of probation is unconstitutionally vague. We will find merit to this contention and modify the condition at issue. In all other respects, we will affirm.
DISCUSSION
One of Zennettas probation conditions required that she "[n]ot use any force or violence on any person except in verifiable self-defense." Zennetta contends this probation condition is void for vagueness. She states that the phrase "verifiable self-defense" is meaningless because she has no way of knowing what type of lawful self-defense would violate the condition, and no criteria establish what "verifiable" means.
Respondent agrees that the condition is void for vagueness and asks that the probation condition be modified to prohibit the use of force or violence upon any person "except in lawful self-defense." Appellant did not file a response to respondents concession.
"A probation condition is subject to the `void for vagueness doctrine, and thus `must be sufficiently precise for the probationer to know what is required of him. . . . [Citations.]" (People v. Lopez (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 615, 630.) A probation condition will not be held void for vagueness " ` "if any reasonable and practical construction can be given its language or if its terms may be made reasonably certain by reference to other definable sources." " (Ibid.)
We accept respondents concession that the term "verifiable" is vague in the context of the probation condition here. What constitutes lawful self-defense is well defined in the law. In the past, when a probation condition was not sufficiently drawn we have modified the condition and affirmed the condition as modified. (See People v. Garcia (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 97, 103, and People v. Lopez, supra, 66 Cal.App.4th at p. 629.) We will modify the condition here.
DISPOSITION
The trial court is ordered to modify Zennettas probation condition regarding the use of self-defense to read: "The Minor is not to use force or violence upon any person except in lawful self-defense." In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. --------------- Notes: Before Dibiaso, Acting P.J., Wiseman, J., and Levy, J.