Legal Opinion

People v. Alejandro R. (In re Alejandro R.)

California Court of Appeal, 1st District

Decided December 30, 2015No. A144398PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMargulies, J.

*560Appellant Alejandro R., a minor, admitted to being an accessory to illegal drug sales and was found to be a ward of the court. In addition to typical conditions of probation, the juvenile court imposed a condition requiring appellant to submit to the warrantless search of his electronic devices and his use of social media. Appellant challenges the condition as substantively invalid and unconstitutionally overbroad. We conclude, following our recent decision in In re Ricardo P. (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 676, 193 Cal.Rptr.3d 883 (Ricardo P. ), that the condition, while valid under People v. Lent…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. People v. LentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  2. People v. Eric J.California Supreme Court · 1979
  3. People v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  4. People v. CarbajalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. In Re Sade C.California Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. People v. A.S. (In re A.S.), California Court of Appeal, 1st District2016
  2. People v. Mark C. (In re Mark C.), California Court of Appeal, 1st District2016
  3. People v. Trujillo, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  4. In re Mark C.California Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. People v. Juan R. (In re Juan R.), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

3 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