Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Super. Ct. No. 08F03820
HULL, J.Defendant Turrone Derell George pleaded no contest to unlawful possession of a concealed firearm. (Pen. Code, § 12025, subd. (b)(6).) As part of his plea, it was agreed he would be placed on probation for up to five years and the charge would become a misdemeanor after a year.
On January 8, 2009, the trial court placed defendant on probation for three years, imposing various terms and conditions. On April 7, 2009, the trial court added a probation condition “that defendant not own or possess any dangerous or deadly weapons nor remain in any building or vehicle where any person has such a weapons [sic] nor remain in the presence of any armed person.”
On appeal, defendant contends that this probation condition was added without proper notice in violation of due process. He argues the record reflects the probation condition was added ex parte, without notice to defendant, as required by Penal Code section 1203.2, subdivision (b). The People concede that, on the state of the record, the matter must be remanded. We accept the People’s concession and remand the matter for resentencing.
Although we are remanding the matter, we shall briefly address defendant’s remaining contentions for guidance on resentencing.
Defendant contends that several of the probation conditions imposed are unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. Defendant specifically complains about condition No 3 (not using or handling of drugs), condition No. 4 (not being present in places where drugs are present), and the later added condition (not being present in places where weapons are present). The People appropriately concede that these provisions lack the specific requirement of knowledge and should be corrected at resentencing. (See In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 890.) To the extent defendant maintains the conditions are otherwise vague, overbroad, or inappropriate, he should make those arguments in the trial court at the resentencing hearing.
Finally, defendant contends the fines and fees which cannot be imposed as conditions of probation should be so designated in the minute order. He may make that request for clarification to the trial court at resentencing.
Disposition
The matter is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the views set forth in this opinion.
We concur: SIMS, Acting P. J., CANTIL-SAKAUYE, J.