California Court of Appeal

Conviction of defendant for possession of child pornography is affirmed and two of defendant's probation conditions are modified, where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it declined to assign the motion to suppress to the judge who granted defendant's motion to suppress in the first case; 2) the motion to suppress was properly denied; 3) two of defendant's probation conditions - a ban on possession of any pornographic or sexually explicit material, and a ban on possession or use of any data encryption technique program - are unconstitutionally vague, as there are situations in which defendant may unwittingly violate the conditions; and 4) the probation conditions can be modified to add a knowledge requirement.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/06/2014
• Published 11/06/2014

Judges

• Premo

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel