Legal Opinion

People v. Rodriguez

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 20, 2013No. H039137PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GROVER, J.

I. Introduction

We are asked once again to consider whether various probation conditions are unconstitutionally vague and overbroad without an explicit scienter element. A related claim is that an explicit constructive knowledge requirement is unconstitutional. We will conclude that the constructive knowledge element in three probation conditions is not vague. We will also conclude that scienter is implicit in some of the challenged conditions, although a knowledge element should be added to cure concerns about a prohibition on the use or possession of “intoxicants.” As to a…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. United States v. SokolowSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. People v. LentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. People v. WelchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  4. People Ex Rel. Gallo v. AcunaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. People v. OlguinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. People v. ContrerasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  2. People v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  3. People v. HartleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  4. People v. Heng SemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. People v. GonzalezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API