The court improperly delegated the judicial authority to decide sentencing (whether a defendant will participate in a treatment program) to the probation department, in violation of Article III, section 3 of the California Constitution. Delegation to a probation officer of a ministerial act or support service is lawful, but the ultimate responsibility of imposing sentence is a judicial function. However, the Court of Appeal did not strike the condition, choosing instead to remand the case for the trial court to reconsider it.
The Court also found that a related drug/chemical testing condition likely violated Lent because drugs were not involved in the underlying offense, and that the condition could be construed as being both overbroad and vague. Thus, the Court remanded with directions that the trial court reconsider the condition and/or modify it.