People v. Reed CA3

California Court of Appeal Mar 7, 2022 No. C093719Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that probation conditions prohibiting the legal use of marijuana and requiring unfettered chemical testing were not reasonably related to the defendant's future criminality, and that the trial court improperly delegated the authority to modify these conditions to the probation department. Additionally, the court held that the administrative fee must be vacated because it was not orally pronounced and is unenforceable under current law.

Issues

Whether probation conditions prohibiting the use or possession of marijuana and requiring chemical testing are reasonably related to future criminality.
Whether the trial court improperly delegated its authority to the probation department regarding the modification of probation conditions.
Whether the administrative fee imposed in the clerk's minutes but not orally pronounced is valid.

Disposition. remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We conclude the imposition of a ban on the legal use of marijuana and subjecting defendant to unfettered testing is not reasonably related to preventing defendant’s future criminality.”

“It was and remains the trial court’s job to decide which probation conditions should be imposed, and it is not proper to leave the question to the probation department.”

“Where the sentencing court’s oral pronouncement of sentence varies from the written minute order, it is the oral pronouncement that prevails.”

Filed 3/7/22 P. v. Reed CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C093719

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20F6978)

MARCEL DAMIEN REED,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Marcel Damien Reed pleaded no contest to evading a police officer and the trial court placed him on probation for two years. Defendant objects to two conditions of probation: (1) prohibiting him from the use or possession marijuana; and (2) requiring him to submit to chemical testing at any time. He further argues the trial court imposed an invalid administrative fee. We shall direct the court to impose appropriately tailored conditions and vacate the administrative fee. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At about 6:00 a.m. on August 13, 2020, California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers in a helicopter spotted defendant riding a black sport motorcycle in the Happy Valley

area. He was traveling at a high rate of speed and passing cars over the double yellow lines. When he stopped to hide behind a business in town, an Anderson police officer attempted to contact him. As the officer got out of his car, defendant sped off and went off-road with his motorcycle. During the subsequent chase, defendant ran through a stop sign without stopping in front of a CHP officer. The CHP officer activated his emergency lights and siren, but defendant continued to speed away through two more stop signs. The ground units broke off the chase while the helicopter continued to follow the rider. When defendant finally parked, officers approached him at gunpoint and arrested him. Defendant was driving on a suspended driver’s license. The prosecution filed a criminal complaint charging defendant with evading an officer with disregard for public safety and driving on a suspended or revoked driver’s license. (Veh. Code, §§ 28002, 14601.1, subd. (a).) Defendant pleaded no contest to evading a police officer and the other charge was dismissed. Defendant’s probation report shows he has a single prior conviction in 2016 for violation of section 23109, subdivision (a) of the Vehicle Code–illegal speed contest. In his probation interview, defendant admitted to drinking six beers every few months and smoking marijuana and ingesting edible marijuana products every few weeks. Nothing in his prior criminal history or personal history demonstrates any drug or alcohol problems. The trial court suspended imposition of defendant’s sentence for two years and placed him on formal probation. The conditions of probation imposed by the trial court included requirements defendant conform to the general conditions of probation from the probation department and submit to chemical testing at the request of any police officer at any time. During sentencing, defense counsel raised the following objections: “[Counsel]: Your Honor, I just want to say a few words about his general conditions of probation, specifically, Number 10. I think number ten states that he does

People v. Reed CA3

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, C093719

MARCEL DAMIEN REED,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief