Opinion ID: 773009
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Parks and Recreational Facilities

Text: 31 The defendant also challenges the condition which prohibits him from being on any school grounds, child care center, playground, park, recreational facility or in any area in which children are likely to congregate. While the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a condition which restricts the defendant's ability to visit places where children are likely to congregate, we find the condition as written ambiguous and, depending on its meaning, excessively broad. It is not clear whether the clause in which children are likely to congregate applies only to any area, or to the other places listed. In particular, it is unclear whether the prohibition applies only to parks and recreational facilities in which children congregate, or whether it would bar the defendant from visiting Yellowstone National Park or joining an adult gym. In view of the defendant's prior child sex abuse, the court had justification to impose a condition of probation that prohibits the defendant from being at educational and recreational facilities where children congregate. In our view, however, there would be no justification to forbid the defendant from being at parks and educational or recreational facilities where children do not congregate. We remand for clarification of this passage of the condition of probation. 32 Finally, the defendant contends that the District Court abused its discretion in barring him from unsupervised contact with children under eighteen. We find no abuse of discretion in this condition.