People v. Hidalgo CA1/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 2025A170371California3,744 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

The Charges and Parole Revocation Petition On January 3, 2024, the Mendocino County District Attorney filed a complaint in case No. 24CR03294 charging Hidalgo with knowingly bringing drug paraphernalia into jail (§ 4573, subd. (a)) (count 1) and falsely identifying himself to a peace officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a)) (count 2). The complaint further alleged as to count 1 that Hidalgo suffered a prior “strike” felony conviction (arson, § 451, subd. (d)) within the meaning of sections 1170.12 and 667. On that same day, a petition for revocation of parole was filed in case No. 24CR03295, alleging Hidalgo violated the conditions of his parole by committing the offenses charged in the complaint in case No. 24CR03294. On January 29, following a preliminary hearing, the complaint was amended to include circumstances in aggravation for sentencing. The Motion to Suppress Evidence On March 1, Hidalgo filed a motion to suppress evidence that he claimed was the fruit of an unlawful detention and subsequent searches. On March 18, the trial court held a hearing on the motion. The court heard testimony from August Kinney, a sergeant with the Ukiah Police Department at the time of his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.