California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Southern (In re Southern), A152997 (Cal. App. 2018):
must include anger management. And we do not agree that the type of counseling to be ordered is left to the "whim" of the probation officer, or that the probation officer could order any type of counseling regardless of its relation to Felicity's offense or the goals of her rehabilitation. The probation department's authority to enforce court-ordered conditions does not authorize a probation officer to make unreasonable demands. (Olguin, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 383.) Furthermore, a probation condition must be interpreted in context and " 'will not be held void for vagueness "if any reasonable and practical construction can be given its language or if its terms may be made reasonably certain by reference to other definable sources." ' " (People v. Lopez (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 615, 630.) In the context of this case, which includes the probation department's detailed report, the counseling condition is intended to address the wide range of challenges that Felicity faces, which are not limited to anger management.
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.