California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Arredondo, 199 Cal.Rptr.3d 563, 245 Cal.App.4th 186 (Cal. App. 2016):
3 In contrast, search conditions imposed in connection with a grant of paroleare not based on consent, and "[t]he consent exception to the warrant requirement may not be invoked" to validate them, because "parole is not a matter of choice." (People v. Reyes(1998) 19 Cal.4th 743, 749, 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 734, 968 P.2d 445.) Similarly, because a juvenile offender "has no choice whether or not to accept a condition of probation that subjects him to a warrantless search," a search pursuant to such a condition cannot be upheld on grounds of consent. (In re Tyrell J.(1994) 8 Cal.4th 68, 83, 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 33, 876 P.2d 519, overruled on another ground in In re Jaime P.(2006) 40 Cal.4th 128, 139, 51 Cal.Rptr.3d 430, 146 P.3d 965 ; cf. In re Curtis T.(1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1391, 1397, 263 Cal.Rptr. 296 [entry into juvenile's bedroom, where stolen property found, was authorized under "access condition" of "home supervision agreement" signed by minor and parent].)
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.