X hits on this document

Word document

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION - page 34 / 43

95 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

34 / 43

Reasonably read, paragraph (1)(e) would prohibit gang members from entering a public store where prescription drugs are sold.  The provision is also vague as to whether the “Without a prescription” language applies to each clause and whether it means a prescription held by the gang member or the person in possession of a controlled substance in the gang member’s presence.  Paragraph (1)(e) therefore cannot stand.  

VIII

Trespassing Provision

Paragraph (1)(h) of the preliminary injunction prohibits gang members from “[b]eing present on or in any property not open to the general public, except (1) with the prior written consent of the owner, owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the property, or (2) in the presence of and with the voluntary consent of the owner, owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the property.”  Defendants contend this provision infringes on familial association rights because, hypothetically, “persons would be in contempt of the injunction order if they go to a relative’s home where the owner may not be home or is home but unable to give consent due to a health emergency.”  

We are not persuaded.  As noted earlier, an injunction may not impose a greater burden on the constitutional right of association than is necessary to serve the governmental interest at stake.  (Acuna, supra, 14 Cal.4th at pp. 1115, 1120-1122.)  Investigator Villanueva explained the Broderick Boys take

34

Document info
Document views95
Page views95
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 00:10:24 UTC 2016
Pages43
Paragraphs202
Words10151

Comments