In re M.G. CA1/5

Filed 9/12/22 In re M.G. CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

In re M.G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. M.G., A162652 Defendant and Appellant. (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. J2100094)

Appellant M.G. (Appellant) appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional order imposing a probation condition prohibiting him from being in Alameda County unless with a parent or guardian. He contends the condition is unconstitutionally overbroad. We modify the condition and affirm. BACKGROUND On February 9, 2021, Berkeley Police Department officers responded to an attempted carjacking on Grant Street and Hearst Avenue. Appellant, who matched the description of one of the suspects, was in the area on a scooter, and he was apprehended by the police. Officers searched the area

1

where Appellant had been riding and found a loaded semi-automatic handgun. On February 11, 2021, the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office filed a juvenile wardship petition, alleging Appellant violated Penal Code section 25850, subdivision (a) (carrying a loaded firearm) and Penal Code section 25400, subdivision (a)(2) (carrying a concealed firearm), with special allegations. Pursuant to a negotiated agreement, Appellant admitted to being an accessory after the fact in violation of Penal Code section 32. The juvenile court released Appellant into the custody of his mother in Contra Costa County, on various terms and conditions, including that Appellant stay out of Alameda County unless with a parent or guardian. The matter was transferred from Alameda County to Contra Costa County. At the May 2021 dispositional hearing, the juvenile court declared Appellant a ward of the court. The court placed Appellant at the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility for six months, followed by a 180-day ranch aftercare period. The court also imposed a number of probation conditions to follow Appellant’s release, including the challenged prohibition on being in Alameda County unless with a parent or guardian. This appeal followed. DISCUSSION Appellant contends the juvenile court’s probation condition number 25, that he “stay out of Alameda County unless with a parent/guardian” is unconstitutionally overbroad. We modify the condition and affirm. The juvenile court has broad discretion to impose probation conditions “that it may determine fitting and proper to the end that justice may be done