In re A.W. CA1/1

Filed 8/18/20 In re A.W. CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

In re A.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A157072 v. A.W., (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J19- Defendant and Appellant. 00202)

A.W. appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional order placing him on home supervision and imposing various conditions, including an electronic search condition. His sole contention on appeal is that the electronic search condition should be stricken pursuant to People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481 (Lent), because it bears no reasonable relationship to his offense or history. We conclude the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in imposing an electronic search condition, but that the language of the condition requires refinement to comply with In re Ricardo P. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1113 (Ricardo P.), and therefore remand for further consideration.

1

BACKGROUND The Contra Costa County District Attorney filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition alleging A.W. committed felony second degree burglary of a vehicle. (Pen. Code, § 459.) The probation officer’s report indicates the allegation arose from an incident in which Oakland police officers detained A.W. and another individual after the two were found standing next to the broken window of an open rear-passenger door of a vehicle in a parking lot. A.W. stated they were “trying to hang out with their female friends,” and they “needed a ‘whip’ ” because they “did not want to walk in the cold.” The other individual “used a rock to break the window” but then “did not know how to start the vehicle.” During A.W.’s interview with probation, he expressed remorse for the crime and stated it was “spontaneous, unplanned, and he was unaware [the other individual] was going to break into a vehicle.” When asked about his “ ‘Ghost Town’ ” gang associations, A.W. responded, “ ‘That’s what I bang.’ ” A.W. confirmed he “associates with” Ghost Town, and the gang’s activities included “ ‘Shooting [and] Killing.’ ” When asked if these activities bothered him he replied, “ “Doesn’t bother me. Killing is part of life. If they want to go kill somebody, they can. I don’t care.’ ” Although he denied participating in these activities, he acknowledged “other members have tried to recruit him to participate in these activities.” A.W. had lost three friends to “gang violence” and stated that after their deaths he was “ ‘ready to kill’ the rival gang members.” He reported his cousin associated with a different gang, “Murder Dubs.” A.W. had a “good relationship” with his mother who he lived with and stated that if he does not follow the rules at home, she “will take away his phone and video games.” A.W. had “sporadic[]” attendance at several 2