In re F.A. CA4/3
Filed 9/23/16 In re F.A. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
In re F.A., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
THE PEOPLE, G051681 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DL041335) v. OPINION F.A.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Fred W. Slaughter, Judge. Affirmed. Kyle D. Smith, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Scott C. Taylor, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *
INTRODUCTION F.A. was declared a ward of the juvenile court, subject to the conditions of probation following a stint in juvenile hall. On appeal, F.A. challenges two of the probation conditions on the ground they are constitutionally overbroad. We reject F.A.’s arguments, and therefore affirm the juvenile court’s dispositional order. First, the probation condition that a minor not associate with anyone he or she knows his or her probation officer disapproves of has been determined to be constitutionally valid by the California Supreme Court. Second, the probation condition that a minor obey all orders of his or her probation officer is not constitutionally overbroad.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1 On September 4, 2014, then 16-year-old F.A. was riding a bicycle on Highland Avenue (which is in an area claimed by the Fullerton Tokers Town criminal street gang) with another minor, M.D. Fullerton Police Officer Alan Valdisern was on patrol, in uniform and in a marked police car, driving on Highland Avenue, when he observed F.A. and M.D. Valdisern recognized F.A. from contacts he had had with him at F.A.’s high school. Valdisern noticed neither F.A. nor M.D. was wearing a helmet and neither had a solid forward-facing light on his bicycle, although it was dark. Valdisern initiated a traffic stop by turning on his overhead lights and his spotlight. While M.D. immediately stopped, F.A. looked back at Valdisern, but continued to ride his bike away. When Valdisern made contact with M.D., F.A. slowly
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)