Is a probationer's electronic devices subject to warrantless search?

Malik J. approved a condition that subjected any electronic devices such as cell phones, computers and notepads in the probationer's custody and control to warrantless search, reasoning that officers reasonably needed to determine whether devices in the probationer's possession were stolen. Bearing in mind that perfect fit was impossible, the fact that a narrower condition could serve this same goal did not render the condition overbroad. ( Malik J., supra , 240 Cal.App.4th at pp. 902, 904, 193 Cal.Rptr.3d 370.) The condition imposed here is similar to the one approved in Malik J. , albeit without limitations on forensic examination or accessing remotely stored information. Although the condition does not expressly limit its scope to electronic devices in Patton's custody and control (e.g., not computers he may leave at work), that is its reasonable construction. (See People v. Hall (2017) 2 Cal.5th 494, 501, 213 Cal.Rptr.3d 561, 388 P.3d 794 [probation conditions should not be invalidated on constitutional grounds if they can be given a reasonable and practical construction].)⁸