California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Hopkins, 30 Cal.App.4th 485, 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 861 (Cal. App. 1994):
3 See People v. Beach, supra, 147 Cal.App.3d at pp. 620-621, 195 Cal.Rptr. 381 (holding that a banishment condition was overly broad); and People v. Keller, supra, 76 Cal.App.3d at pp. 839-840, 143 Cal.Rptr. 184 (stating that the condition of waiving the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures on a plea to theft of a 49-cent ballpoint pen was like using "a Mack truck to crush a gnat").
4 See People v. Beach, supra, 147 Cal.App.3d at pp. 621-623, 195 Cal.Rptr. 381 (holding that a banishment condition was overly intrusive of constitutional rights); In re White, supra, 97 Cal.App.3d at pp. 148-150, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562 (holding that a condition preventing the probationer from entering a certain area of town unnecessarily infringed upon the right of free movement); and People v. Pointer (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 1128, 199 Cal.Rptr. 357 (finding that a condition prohibiting conception during probation was too restrictive).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.