What constructive restrictions must be placed on a person on a diversion program who has not been convicted of a crime?

Were we writing upon a clean slate we would reach a different conclusion. In light of the fact that the person eligible for the diversion program has identified himself or herself as, at a minimum, an experimental or tentative [22 Cal.App.4th 1571] narcotic user in need of assistance, it would not seem unreasonable to strengthen his or her resolve in the same manner utilized for those on formal probation. That is, with knowledge he or she may be subject to a reasonably conducted search at any time, a divertee, like a probationer, would be less inclined to have narcotics or dangerous drugs in his or her possession. (Cf. People v. Mason (1971) 5 Cal.3d 759, 763, 97 Cal.Rptr. 302, 488 P.2d 630, overruled on other grounds in People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481, 486, fn. 1, 124 Cal.Rptr. 905, 541 P.2d 545.) Similar constructive restrictions may be imposed upon narcotics addicts, who also have not been found guilty of a crime. (People v. Myers (1972) 6 Cal.3d 811, 819, and fn. 4, 100 Cal.Rptr. 612, 494 P.2d 684.)