Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
In Re J.J., Case No. D055603 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2010)

In Re J.J., Case No. D055603 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2010)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 3,283 |Likes:
Court found that Blanket ban on use of internet and social networking sites as a probation condition unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.
Court found that Blanket ban on use of internet and social networking sites as a probation condition unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.

More info:

Published by: Venkat Balasubramani on Oct 19, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Filed 10/15/10 In re J.J. CA4/1
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified forpublication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publicationor ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICTDIVISION ONESTATE OF CALIFORNIAIn re J.J., a Person Coming Under theJuvenile Court Law.THE PEOPLE,Plaintiff and Respondent,v.J.J.,Defendant and Appellant.D055603(Super. Ct. No. J213914)APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, AmaliaMeza and Carolyn M. Caietti, Judges. Affirmed as modified.The court sustained the petition alleging that 15-year-old J.J. unlawfully received astolen motorcycle, found the offense to be a felony, and adjudged him a ward of the court.The court placed J.J. on probation and ordered him to complete a 21-day, in-patientdetoxification program. It also imposed a lengthy set of probation conditions. On appeal,
2J.J. argues that the conditions which restrict his computer and Internet use areunconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We agree and modify the judgment.FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUNDDeputy Erik Duesler stopped J.J. on the highway in Crest after observing him riding a50cc Honda off-road motorcycle without a helmet. When asked about the motorcycle'sregistration, J.J. told Deputy Duesler that he had purchased it from a guy he knew only asSkye for $200 three or four days before. J.J. did not have the pink slip. He was also unableto provide Deputy Duesler with a phone number or address for Skye. An inspection of themotorcycle showed that it had been modified to operate without a key. Deputy Dueslerarrested J.J. after he determined that the motorcycle was stolen.At the dispositional hearing, the court reviewed the probation report, which describedJ.J.'s extensive drug use. The deputy district attorney reminded the court that J.J. committedthe offense of receiving stolen property less than two weeks after his annual review on aprior offense of shooting a person with a pellet gun. The court followed the probationdepartment's recommendation of an in-patient detoxification program and continuedwardship. The parties did not object to any of the conditions of probation. Those conditionsincluded the following:"Minor shall not use a computer that contains any encryption, hacking,cracking, scanning, keystroke monitoring, security testing, steganography,Trojan or virus software. [¶] . . . [¶]"The minor is prohibited from participating in chat rooms, using instantmessaging such as ICQ, MySpace, Facebook, or other similarcommunication programs.
3"The minor shall not have a MySpace page, a Facebook page, or any othersimilar page and shall delete any existing page. The minor shall not useMySpace, Facebook, or any similar program."The minor is not to use a computer for any purpose other than schoolrelated assignments. The minor is to be supervised when using a computerin the common area of his/her residence or in a school setting."DISCUSSIONI.
 Applicable Law
 Welfare and Institutions Code section 730, subdivision (b) provides that the juvenile court may impose on the minor "any and all reasonable conditions that it maydetermine fitting and proper to the end that justice may be done and the reformation andrehabilitation of the ward enhanced." The juvenile court has broader discretion informulating the terms of the minor's probation than that exercised with adultprobationers. (
 In re Victor L.
(2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 902, 910 (
Victor L
.).) "[E]venwhere there is an invasion of protected freedoms 'the power of the state to control theconduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults . . . .'
Ginsberg v. New York 
(1968) 390 U.S. 629, 638.) "This is because juveniles are deemedto be 'more in need of guidance and supervision than adults, and because a minor'sconstitutional rights are more circumscribed.' [Citation.]" (
Victor L.
, at p. 910.) Thus,"
'a condition of probation that would be unconstitutional or otherwise improper for anadult probationer may be permissible for a minor under the supervision of the juvenilecourt.'
" (
 In re Sheena K.
(2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 889 (
Sheena K.
).)Nonetheless, the constitutional doctrines of vagueness and overbreadth may limit thescope of conditions of probation imposed on wards of the juvenile court. "[T]he

Activity (5)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->