People v. Simpson CA4/3

Filed 7/23/25 P. v. Simpson CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063205

v. (Super. Ct. No. 22CF0072)

TYJEE JONQUIL SIMPSON, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Michael A. Leversen, Judge. Affirmed as modified. Jan B. Norman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Steve Oetting and Evan Stele, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

In this criminal proceeding, defendant Tyjee Jonquil Simpson appeals from a probation condition requiring him “not to associate with any person disapproved of by the probation officer.” Simpson raises a single argument on appeal. He argues that the probation condition is unconstitutional and that it should be amended to provide sufficient notice as to what associations are prohibited. Simpson proposes that the probation condition be amended to read, “You are not to associate with any person known to you to be disapproved of by the probation department.” (Underlining added.) The Attorney General concedes that the probation condition is unconstitutionally vague and agrees to the modified language proposed by Simpson. For the reasons below, we agree with Simpson’s contention. As imposed, the probation condition fails to provide fair warning as to which persons are disapproved of by the probation department. Thus, a modification is necessary. We, therefore, modify the probation condition and affirm the judgment in all other respects. STATEMENT OF FACTS The facts in this case are not material to our legal analysis but are provided for context. In January 2022, Simpson walked into a Chevron gas station in Santa Ana, California and told the clerk that he wanted to fill his plastic water bottle with gas. The clerk would not permit him to use the water bottle because only approved containers could be used to purchase gasoline. Simpson retrieved an approved gas can from one of the shelves and purportedly asked “what happens if I take it?” Surveillance video showed the clerk attempting to retrieve the gas can from Simpson, Simpson striking the clerk, and then Simpson running