legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re David R.
On May 15, 2006, the court readjudged appellant, David R., a ward of the court (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602) after it found true an allegation that he committed battery on an officer (Pen. Code, 243, subd. (b)). On May 31, 2006, the court committed David to juvenile hall for 90 days, to be served consecutively to his current commitment, set the maximum term of confinement as two years and two months, reimposed various probation conditions, and credited him with 389 days of predisposition custody credit.
On appeal, David contends the probation conditions prohibiting him from (1) associating with anyone unless approved of by his parents or probation officer and (2) possessing deadly or dangerous weaponsare constitutionally vague and overbroad. David also contends, and the People concede, he is entitled to an additional day of predisposition custody credit. As we shall explain, although we reject Davids contention with respect to the prohibition against possession of dangerous and deadly weapons, we conclude the other probation condition should be modified to expressly state that he must have knowledge of whom his parents or the probation officer disapprove. Court also agree that the predisposition custody credits must be modified.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale