(Super. Ct. No. 08F07417)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Raye , P. J.
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
During an argument with his wife, defendant Hari Prasad threw household objects at her and kicked her. Defendant's daughter was also injured during the altercation. A jury found defendant guilty of corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition and endangering the life or health of a child. The court placed defendant on five years' probation on the condition he serve 365 days in jail and have no contact with "the victim or the victim's family." Defendant challenges the no-contact provision of his probation, arguing it unconstitutionally delegates judicial power to an executive officer and is vague because it lacks a knowledge requirement. We shall affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In the summer of 2008 defendant argued with his wife. During the quarrel, defendant began throwing household objects while his wife and two-year-old daughter looked on. Defendant threw a plastic shelf at his daughter. His wife blocked the shelf, which hit her in the nose, causing a laceration.
Defendant's wife left the apartment with their daughter, taking her to a family member next door. After dropping off their daughter, defendant's wife attempted to walk downstairs; defendant grabbed her and threatened to throw her down the stairs. When she sat down, defendant kicked his wife in the knee, causing an abrasion.
Following the incident, family members took defendant's daughter to a hospital because she could not stand up. Her femur was broken, apparently during the confrontation between her parents.
An information charged defendant with corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition upon his spouse and endangering the life or health of a child under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death. (Pen. Code, §§ 273.5, subd. (a), 273a, subd. (a).) The complaint also alleged, under the second count, that defendant personally inflicted great bodily injury upon the child. Defendant entered a plea of not guilty.
A jury trial followed. The jury found defendant guilty of both charges, but found the great bodily injury allegation not true.
The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on five years' probation on the condition that he serve 365 days in the county jail and "have no contact whatsoever with the victim or the victim's family without prior permission of the probation officer." Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
The People argue that defendant's failure to challenge the probation condition in the trial court has resulted in forfeiture of the issue; a challenge ...