## Facts

- A minor became a ward of the juvenile court after admitting multiple misdemeanor offenses and was placed on probation with conditions, including custody at a county ranch facility.
- Over the next 18 months, the court sustained supplemental petitions for probation violations (including escapes and school attendance issues) and added a condition barring association with any known probationer, parolee, or gang member.
- The court later sustained a petition for concealed possession of a dagger and continued the minor on formal probation.
- A subsequent supplemental petition alleging association with a known probationer was dismissed for insufficient evidence, but the court stated it intended to commit the minor to the California Youth Authority (CYA).
- At a later disposition hearing, the court ordered a CYA commitment but suspended it on conditions that included requiring the minor to leave the United States and live in Iran with family for two years, report to probation upon return, and obtain court approval before changing residence.
- The minor went to Iran but returned after about two months; the probation officer later found the minor living in California without contacting probation.
- A new supplemental petition alleged probation violations based on (1) living in the United States contrary to the Iran-residency condition and (2) associating with a known probationer or gang member.
- The juvenile court sustained the petition, lifted the suspension, and committed the minor to the CYA; the minor appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a juvenile court may enforce a probation condition that effectively banishes a minor from the United States by requiring residence in a foreign country.
2. Whether the juvenile court has statutory authority to order a CYA commitment, suspend its execution, and later “lift” the suspension and commit the minor without a new dispositional determination based on current circumstances.
3. Whether the minor’s additional challenges (validity and proof of the no-association condition and double jeopardy limits) required reversal.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the dispositional order committing the minor to the CYA and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held the Iran-residency requirement was an unconstitutional and invalid banishment condition and could not support a probation-violation finding or loss of liberty.
- The court held juvenile courts lack authority to impose a “suspended CYA commitment” that can later be activated as if it were a standing sentence; a CYA commitment must be justified at the time of commitment under the statutory criteria.
- The court rejected the minor’s remaining challenges as not warranting reversal in light of the dispositive errors on banishment and the suspended-commitment mechanism.

## Legal Principles

- A juvenile probation/wardship condition that functions as banishment from the state or country is invalid and cannot be used as the basis for later confinement.
- A CYA commitment must rest on a contemporaneous dispositional decision applying the juvenile statutory framework, including consideration of the minor’s then-current needs and circumstances and the suitability of less restrictive alternatives.
- The juvenile court may not convert disposition into a deferred-punishment structure by ordering a CYA commitment, suspending it, and later reinstating it without a fresh dispositional analysis.

## Conclusion

The court invalidated a juvenile disposition that conditioned avoidance of CYA commitment on leaving the United States to live abroad and held that juvenile courts cannot “suspend” and later activate a CYA commitment without a new, current dispositional determination; the CYA commitment order was reversed and the matter remanded.


In re Babak S., 18 Cal. App. 4th 1077, 22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 893 (Ct. App. 1993)