From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re J.T.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, First Division
Dec 24, 2008
No. B206718 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 24, 2008)

Opinion


In re J.T., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. J.T., Defendant and Appellant. B206718 California Court of Appeal, Second District, First Division December 24, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Robert Ambrose, Judge, Los Angeles County Superior Ct. No. JJ14419

Courtney M. Selan, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Keith H. Borjon and John R. Gorey, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

BAUER, J.

Judge of the Orange County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

SUMMARY

Minor appellant challenges the decision of the juvenile court sustaining a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition against her on the ground a condition of probation is vague and overbroad. We agree and modify that condition.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The juvenile court sustained a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition against appellant with respect to one allegation of battery. The court found the battery to be a misdemeanor, declared appellant to be a ward of the court, and ordered appellant placed home on probation on conditions including that she not associate with anyone of whom her parents or probation officer disapproved.

DISCUSSION

Citing In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, the parties agree that the non-association condition is vague and overbroad. We agree and modify the condition to include a knowledge element. (Id. at pp. 891-892.)

DISPOSITION

We modify appellant’s probation condition number 15 to state as follows: Do not associate with anyone known to you to be disapproved by your parents or probation officer. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

We concur: MALLANO, P.J., ROTHSCHILD, J.


Summaries of

In re J.T.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, First Division
Dec 24, 2008
No. B206718 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 24, 2008)
Case details for

In re J.T.

Case Details

Full title:In re J.T., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, First Division

Date published: Dec 24, 2008

Citations

No. B206718 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 24, 2008)