People v. Contreras
Annotate this CaseWhile Contreras was being investigated for stealing money from a coworker‘s purse, officers found heroin on his person. Shortly thereafter, he was charged with possession of heroin and second degree burglary. He pleaded no contest. The court suspended sentencing, granted probation in both felony cases, found that as a result of the new felony offenses, Contreras had violated probation in the misdemeanor cases, revoked probation in those cases, and imposed consecutive jail sentences of 720 days. Contreras challenged probation conditions, claiming that requiring him to stay out of Kohl‘s stores was unconstitutionally overbroad as not closely tailored to his rehabilitation and restricting his right to travel, and vague, as failing to require that he knowingly stay away from those stores. The court of appeal held that the condition was not unconstitutionally infirm,. Contreras also argued that a condition prohibiting possession of, use of, or access to, a police scanner or surveillance equipment was unconstitutionally vague because the term, “surveillance equipment” was vague and could include devices like tablet computers that can be used for other purposes and was vague for not including a knowledge requirement. The court remanded, holding that the condition is vague for not providing sufficient notice of items prohibited. The court rejected an argument under Proposition 47, which could reduce defendant‘s felony offenses to misdemeanors.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.