The Court of Appeal held that the electronic search condition and the condition prohibiting the use of encrypted data, files, disks or volumes were unreasonable under Lent where there was no relationship between appellant’s crimes and his use of electronic devices, social media, or encrypted data. The Court further held that the conditions prohibiting in-person and internet contact with minors or persons appellant believes to be minors were unconstitutionally overbroad. Specifically, the Court reasoned that while there was a compelling state interest in preventing appellant from committing further sexual assaults against minors, the no-contact conditions were not narrowly tailored in that they exposed the minor to possible probation violations for interactions that – especially give his young age – are a frequent part of life.
^