In re N.B. CA4/1

Filed 10/10/25 In re N.B. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In re N.B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

D084996 THE PEOPLE, (Super. Ct. No. J246062) Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

N.B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Tilisha T. Martin, Judge. Affirmed. Stephanie L. Gunther, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Alana Cohen Butler and Amanda Lloyd, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent.

1

N.B., a juvenile, appeals a probation condition imposed by the juvenile court after his admission at disposition, on grounds that the condition is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We conclude that the probation condition is neither unconstitutionally vague nor overbroad, and we accordingly affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND N.B. admitted to felony assault, and the juvenile court placed N.B. on probation. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1).) The juvenile court found N.B. had made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of his constitutional rights, adjudged him as a ward of the court, and imposed a list of probation conditions. At disposition, defense counsel objected to a condition extending N.B.’s Fourth Amendment waiver to permit law enforcement to search N.B.’s electronic devices. Defense counsel did not, however, object to any other condition, including one requiring N.B. to “not use, sell or possess alcohol, drugs, drug paraphernalia, harmful intoxicants, non-prescribed medications, or any type of mind-altering substances.” Defense counsel timely filed a notice of appeal which appealed the September 24, 2024, disposition hearing order which extended N.B.’s Fourth Amendment waiver to his electronic devices. The notice does not expressly list the condition prohibiting use or possession of non-prescribed medications. Despite this, N.B.’s briefs solely challenge the condition requiring him to “not use, sell or possess . . . non-prescribed medications” (hereafter “the condition”).