Is a probation order requiring a defendant to submit to a polygraph examination limited to questions relevant to compliance with the condition that he must not be alone with young girls?

In People v. Miller (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 1311, the defendant was convicted of committing a lewd and lascivious act upon a minor and was placed on probation with the condition that he have no private contact with minor females, and that he submit to a polygraph examination at the direction of his probation officer. In rejecting numerous arguments as to why the polygraph condition was unreasonable, the reviewing court pointed out that compliance with the condition that the defendant not be alone with young girls is difficult to enforce, and "[t]he polygraph condition helps to monitor compliance and is therefore reasonably related to the defendant's criminal offense. Because this condition is aimed at deterring and discovering criminal conduct most likely to occur during unsupervised contact with young females, the condition is reasonably related to future criminality. [Citations.]" (Id. at p. 1314.)

In response to the related contention that the polygraph condition also was overbroad because no restrictions were placed on the questions the examiner could ask, the appellate court stated: "This is patently incorrect. The polygraph condition was expressly requested by the probation officer and imposed by the court to monitor defendant's compliance with the condition prohibiting unsupervised contact with young females. Thus any polygraph examination administered to defendant necessarily will be

Page 8

limited to questions relevant to compliance with that condition." (People v. Miller, supra, 208 Cal.App.3d at p. 1315.)