People v. Jones CA4/1

Filed 6/18/24 P. v. Jones CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D082064

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCS324213)

RICKY CARLSON JONES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Michael J. Popkins, Judge. Affirmed. Stephanie A. Lickel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Collette C. Cavalier and James Spradley, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Ricky Carlson Jones pled guilty to one count of grand theft (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a); count 1) and was sentenced to two years of probation. He contends several probation conditions the trial court imposed are invalid as

constitutionally overbroad. We conclude Jones, in failing to identify and argue any specific constitutional rights these conditions infringe, waived any challenge to the conditions’ constitutional overbreadth. We further conclude the challenged conditions are valid because they are reasonably related to the state’s legitimate interest in deterring future criminality, which interest outweighs any minimal burdens the conditions impose on Jones. We thus affirm. I. After stealing nearly 150 items of merchandise worth more than $28,000 from his employer, Jones was charged with grand theft and entered into a plea agreement. Probation recommended imposing certain conditions, including two weapons conditions: (1) “Not knowingly possess a firearm, ammunition, or deadly weapon,” and (2) “Do not knowingly own, transport, sell, or possess any weapon, firearm, replica firearm or weapon, ammunition, or any instrument used as a weapon.” Probation also recommended three drug conditions: (1) “Do not knowingly use or possess any controlled substance without a valid prescription and submit a valid sample for testing for the use of controlled substances/alcohol when required by the P.O., law enforcement officer, or treatment provider,” (2) “Participate in a substance use level of care assessment within 7 business days if directed by” the P.O., and (3) “Enroll in & adhere to substance use treatment & recovery services, as clinically indicated if directed by” the P.O. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed the above conditions over defense counsel’s objection that they had “zero connection to the offense.”