In re Kacy S.

Juveniles Daren S. and his brother Kacy S. (defendants) were involved in an altercation after school. Daren refused to leave when instructed by a teacher and got into a fight with another person. Kacy did not join the fight but prevented the teacher from intervening to break up the altercation while screaming profanities at the teachers and students. Daren and Kacy admitted their offenses under § 602 of the California Welfare and Institutions Code (the code). A juvenile court decided to leave Daren and Kacy in the custody of their parents, placed them on six months’ probation, and required them to undergo urine testing. The juvenile court required urine testing as a probation condition as authorized by § 729.3 of the code, which provided that if a juvenile’s offense fell under § 602 and a court permitted the juvenile to remain in the physical custody of the juvenile’s parent or guardian, the court could order the juvenile to undergo urine testing. Legislators had determined that the use of alcohol and drugs were precursors to future criminal conduct. Daren and Kacy appealed. Despite § 729.3, Daren and Kacy argued that it was improper for the juvenile court to require urine testing because neither their offenses nor their backgrounds implicated substance use, testing was an invasion of their privacy, and testing was a violation of substantive due process due to arbitrariness and capriciousness.