People v. Robinson

Opinion

SABRAW, J.

Defendant Antoinette Robinson appeals from an order granting probation, challenging one of the conditions imposed. We affirm.

Defendant was charged with transporting and selling cocaine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352.) After initially pleading not guilty, defendant withdrew that plea and entered a plea of nolo contendere. The court then entered a finding of guilty.

The court granted defendant probation, conditioned on serving eight months in county jail and payment of $200 restitution. In addition, the court adopted the probation officer’s recommendation that defendant not associate with anyone of known criminal record.

Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Defendant asserts that the court’s action in conditioning the grant of probation on the requirement that she avoid persons of known criminal record violated California case law defining standards for conditions of probation. We disagree.

In

People

v.

Lent

(1975) 15 Cal.3d 481 [124 Cal.Rptr. 905, 541 P.2d 545], the Supreme Court approved the holding in

People

v.

Dominguez

(1967) 256 Cal.App.2d 623, 627 [64 Cal.Rptr. 290], where the court adopted a three-pronged test for assessing the validity of probation conditions. “A

[818]

condition of probation will not be held invalid unless it ‘(1) has no relationship to the crime of which the offender was convicted, (2) relates to conduct which is not in itself criminal, and (3) requires or forbids conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality.’ ”

(People

v.