People v. Halfhide CA3

Filed 5/13/25 P. v. Halfhide CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Yolo) ----

THE PEOPLE, C100957

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR20233617)

v.

DAMIAAN ANTHONY HALFHIDE,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Damiaan Anthony Halfhide guilty of assault, false imprisonment, contempt of court, and endangering the health of a child. The court granted probation and imposed an electronic search condition as part of its grant of probation. Defendant claims this probation condition is unreasonable and unconstitutionally overbroad. We agree the electronic search condition is unreasonable and remand with directions to strike or tailor the condition at issue.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In November 2023, defendant was at home with two of his children while his wife, daughter, and stepdaughter were shopping. Defendant was drinking alcohol during the day and became upset when his wife returned home later than expected. When defendant’s wife, daughter, and stepdaughter returned home defendant was asleep on the couch. When he woke up he appeared inebriated and complained that the house was dirty. Defendant went into the kitchen, threw his wife’s and stepdaughter’s phones into one of the younger children’s play area, and then walked through a hallway to his room. Defendant’s wife later found a half-empty bottle of vodka and emptied the contents into the bathtub. Defendant returned to the hallway and started to film his family members with his cell phone. His stepdaughter walked past him, ignoring him, and into the living room to get ready for a party. Defendant followed and continued to film her from an armlength’s distance. Defendant’s stepdaughter testified she did not know why he was filming her. After asking defendant to stop filming her, she reached for his phone. In response, defendant grabbed and twisted her arm. Defendant’s wife came into the room to separate them but moments later defendant and his stepdaughter were grabbing each other’s throats and yelling at each other. Defendant admitted to putting his stepdaughter in a headlock during the altercation. Defendant’s wife again pulled them apart and defendant’s stepdaughter threw his phone out the front door of the house. Defendant’s stepdaughter immediately called 911; police officers arrived and arrested defendant. A first amended information charged defendant with assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(4); count 1); false imprisonment with force and violence (§§ 236, 237, subd. (a); count 2); contempt of