X hits on this document

Word document

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION - page 28 / 43

78 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

28 / 43

language a constitutionally sufficient concreteness.”  [Citation.]  Second, only reasonable specificity is required.  [Citation.]’”  (Totten, supra, 156 Cal.App.4th at p. 47.)  In the context of a gang injunction, only a reasonably specific definition of “active member” is possible in order to give adequate notice while encompassing those who primarily contribute to creation of the public nuisance.  We conclude the definition at issue here is sufficiently specific.  

VI

Association Provision

Defendants challenge a number of individual provisions of the preliminary injunction.  Paragraph (1)(a), the nonassociation provision, prohibits:  “Standing, sitting, walking, driving, gathering or appearing, anywhere in public view or anyplace accessible to the public, with any known member of the Broderick Boys including but not limited to those members identified by name in this order.  This nonassociation order shall not apply when the enjoined parties are inside a school attending class or on school business, or inside a church; however, the nonassociation order shall apply to the enjoined parties when they are traveling to or from any of [sic] school or church.”  Defendants contend this provision infringes on their constitutional rights by prohibiting them from gathering in public places for lawful and peaceful purposes and interfering with intimate family relationships.  According to defendants, “[i]f multiple family members are validated as

28

Document info
Document views78
Page views78
Page last viewedSun Dec 04 04:06:00 UTC 2016
Pages43
Paragraphs202
Words10151

Comments