Delinquency Case Law

In re Justin S. (Nov. 6, 2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 811 [113 Cal.Rptr.2d 466]. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 4.

The juvenile court adjudged a child a ward of the court, alleging a violation of Penal Code section 211 (second-degree robbery). The child had kicked and beaten another child with the help of his friend, who also took money from the victim. The child was placed on probation, which included the condition of house arrest. The child's attorney objected. On appeal, the child challenged two additional conditions of probation: an order "not to engage in delinquent behavior" and an order not to associate with any gang members and anyone his parents or probation officer disapproved of. The child relied on the holding of In re Tanya B. (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1, in which the appellate court held that a child may challenge probation conditions for the first time on appeal.

The Court of Appeal overruled its prior opinion in Tanya B. The appellate court determined that the Supreme Court's holding in People v. Welch (1993) 5 Cal.4th 228, that a defendant may not complain of the unreasonableness of probation conditions for the first time on appeal, was extended to juvenile proceedings. The child in this case argued that the probation conditions were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. Because these claims were "pure questions of law that can be resolved without reference to the particular sentencing record developed in the trial court" (Id. at p. 235), the child was not foreclosed from raising those issues on appeal without objecting to them at the trial court level. The appellate court rejected the child's contention that the condition prohibiting delinquent behavior was vague. The term "delinquent behavior" is defined in Welfare and Institutions Code sections 601 and 602. The appellate court did agree with the child's contention that the condition prohibiting association with gang members was unconstitutionally overbroad. The appellate court modified the condition to state: "Do not associate with any person known to you to be a gang member . . . ." The juvenile court's decision was affirmed.