In re R.G., 2026 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3840 (Cal. Ct. App. 2026)

The California 4th District Court of Appeal struck down a probation condition that prohibited a youth from associating with any known gang members because the condition was not reasonably related to the underlying offense. The court stated in relevant part:

When a gang condition imposed by the juvenile court involves non-criminal conduct and prohibits a minor from engaging in otherwise legal conduct, “we can uphold it only if there is a reasonable connection between the condition and the offense or between the condition and future criminality.” (Edward B., supra, 10 Cal.App.5th at p. 1236; see also, People v. Brandão (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 568, 574 (Brandão).) Gang-related probation conditions are reasonably related to preventing future criminality when there is evidence of the minor’s affiliation with criminal street gangs. (Edward B., supra, 10 Cal.App.5th at p. 1236 [”in the absence of evidence of gang affiliation or association with gang members or risk of gang involvement on [the minor’s] part, the gang condition is not tailored to his future criminality”].)

Here, nothing in the record suggests that minor’s offense was gang related, that he has ties to any criminal street gangs, or that any of his family members have gang ties. Significantly, at the hearing, the People admitted there was “no specific reference to [minor] being a part of the gang.” Thus, the portion of the association condition prohibiting minor from associating or communicating with gang members is not tailored to his future criminality. (Brandão, supra, 210 Cal.App.4th at pp. 576-577; Edward B., supra, 10 Cal.App.5th at p. 1236.)