Veiga

People v. Veiga

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 1019·214 Cal. App. 3d 817·262 Cal. Rptr. 919
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 11, 1989Docket Nos. F010691, F010836California5,376 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dibiaso, J.

After the trial court denied their Penal Code section 995 motions to set aside the information, defendants Keeling and Veiga pled guilty, respectively, to violations of Health and Safety Code sections 11366 and 11353. On their consolidated appeals from orders granting probation, they contend the court erred in denying their section 995 motions. In the published portion of this opinion, we will hold that police entry onto the premises of which the defendants were co-occupants was validated by the consent of an absent co-occupant, notwithstanding the lack of express consent from defendants themselves. Thus, the court properly denied the section 995 motions.

Between 7 and 8 p.m., July 22, 1986, Cynthia Graham arrived home to discover that her brother, Keeling, was holding a party at the Sonora house in which they resided with their grandmother. Graham and the grandmother paid the rent. Keeling had been living there for nine to ten months; Veiga had been staying there as Keeling’s guest for the past two days, with Graham’s permission.

On entry, Graham saw beer in the living room and drug paraphernalia in Keeling’s bedroom. The paraphernalia included a mirror with white…

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.