Opinion
A154526
03-13-2019
In re E.J., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. E.J., Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. JV02969601)
Fifteen-year-old E.J. challenges one condition in a dispositional order declaring her a ward of the juvenile court, following her admission to committing misdemeanor battery (Pen. Code, § 242). The court ordered E.J. to live with her mother subject to numerous terms and conditions of probation, most of which are standard probation conditions and are not challenged. E.J. contends only that the condition that she "be of good citizenship and good conduct" is unconstitutionally vague. This precise condition was stricken, as insufficiently clear to comply with constitutional requirements, in In re P.O. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 288, 299. The Attorney General acknowledges that "as written, the condition is vague" and urges either that the condition be modified or remanded to allow the juvenile court "to fashion a condition that would not be vague." However, we conclude that the condition is simply redundant of other conditions of E.J's probation and thus should be stricken. Other conditions include: "attend classes or job on time and regularly be of good behavior and perform well," "obey all laws," "obey parent(s) or guardian(s)," and "report to and cooperate with the probation officer as directed." The challenged condition therefore is stricken.
/s/_________
POLLAK, P. J. WE CONCUR: /s/_________
STREETER, J. /s/_________
BROWN, J.