J.D., a Minor

In re J.D.,

a Person Coming Under

 the Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.D.,

Defendant and Appellant.

No. A138584

(Contra Costa County

Super. Ct. No. J1101036)

California Courts of Appeal

First Appellate District

Division One

Filed May 14, 2014

ORDER MODIFYING

OPINION AND DENYING

REHEARING

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

THE COURT:

     It is ordered that the published opinion filed herein on April 15, 2014, be modified as follows:

     1A.  On page 1, the fourth sentence in the first paragraph of the opinion is deleted and replaced with the following sentence:

He now appeals the court?s ruling on the suppression motion and challenges various conditions of his probation.

     1B.  On page 1, after the sixth and last sentence in the first paragraph, the following text is added:

We also modify appellant?s probation conditions.  As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

     2.  On page 12, after the last paragraph of the ?DISCUSSION? section, which states ?The motion to suppress was properly denied,? and before the heading ?DISPOSITION,? the following text is added:

   Appellant also challenges the validity of his probation conditions.  After placing appellant on probation in his uncle?s home, the court stated: ?You?re not to change your residence without prior approval of the probation officer and must notify change [sic] of address or phone number within five days.?  The trial court has wide discretion in imposing reasonable conditions of juvenile probation (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 730, subd. (b)), including conditions which enable the court to determine the ward?s place of residence to ensure he or she is residing in a stable environment that promotes rehabilitation.  However, we agree with appellant this condition is not narrowly tailored to avoid the possible impingement on his right to travel.  (Cf. In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875 [probation condition prohibiting minor from associating with disapproved persons unconstitutionally vague].)  We therefore modify the condition to provide that if defendant changes residence, he is to notify the probation officer of his change of address and phone number within five days. 

   The court also forbade appellant to use or possess drugs, alcohol, weapons, or ammunition.  Appellant argues these conditions do not give him fair warning or adequate notice of what is prohibited because ?weapon? is not defined and there is no express scienter requirement.  (In re Sheena K., supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 890-892.)  We agree.  A person may be involuntarily drugged or intoxicated, or unknowingly in constructive possession of weapons or ammunition. Furthermore, the term ?weapon? may include ordinary objects if used to inflict injury.  In order to avoid any ambiguity, we modify the court?s prohibition to make clear that appellant is not to knowingly use or possess drugs, alcohol, dangerous or deadly weapons, or ammunition.

     3. On page 12, after the heading ?DISPOSITION,? the following sentence is deleted: ?The judgment is affirmed.?  The following text is added:

   The trial court?s order imposing conditions of probation is modified as follows:  (1) if appellant changes residence, he is to notify the probation officer of his change of address and phone number within five days; and (2) appellant is not to knowingly use or possess drugs, alcohol, dangerous or deadly weapons, or ammunition.  As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

     This modification is not to be published, except for the modified text on page 1 of the opinion (see paragraph nos. 1A and 1B, above) and the text added to page 12 of the opinion after ?DISPOSITION? (see paragraph no. 3, above).

This modification does not change the judgment.

     The petition for rehearing is denied.

     Dondero,  J.