Is a probation condition requiring a defendant to refrain from associating with any known gang members or associates of any gang, with the exception of immediate family members, valid?

Defendant contends condition No. 2, which prohibits him from associating with any known gang members or associates of any gangs, with the exception of immediate family members, places him in a difficult position. If any of his family members were to bring a gang member or associate into the house, he would have no control over the situation and consequently would violate his probation. Defendant cites no authority, however, to prove his contention that this court should consider the ramifications on his personal life in relation to this condition of probation. In fact, contrary to defendant's assertion, "[a] limitation on the right to associate which takes the form of a probation condition is permissible if it is '(1) primarily designed to meet the ends of rehabilitation and protection of the public and (2) reasonably related to such ends.' " (Lopez, supra, 66 Cal.App.4th at p. 628, quoting U.S. v. Bollinger (9th Cir. 1991) 940 F.2d 478, 480.) Additionally, probation conditions prohibiting an individual from associating with other persons including spouses and other relatives are generally valid when "reasonably related to rehabilitation or reducing future criminality." (People v. Wardlow (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 360, 367 (Wardlow).) For example, in Wardlow, a probation condition was upheld requiring the defendant to refrain from contact with his two brothers. The brothers had been instrumental in the defendant's criminal acts, and the court held that restricting association was reasonably related to rehabilitation and reducing future criminality. (Ibid.) Likewise, a probation condition that required a defendant to not associate with his girlfriend was upheld. (People v. Celestine (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1370.)

Page 6