Jeter

Jeter v. Superior Court

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 3d 934·188 Cal. Rptr. 351·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 1300
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 1983A016529California1,057 words

Opinion

Opinion

Poche, J.

By petition for writ of prohibition (Pen. Code, § 999a), Maurice Jeter challenges the admission of certain evidence at his preliminary hearing alleging that the evidence was the product of an improper entry into his home to execute a search warrant.

Testimony at the preliminary hearing revealed that Officer Munoz, accompanied by four other police officers, arrived at 1224 Fruitvale Avenue about 11 a.m. on July 30, 1981, to serve a search warrant. No surveillance of the premises was undertaken. The officers drove up and parked. Then Officer Munoz knocked on the front door and yelled, “police officers, we have a search warrant. ” He waited a “few seconds” and knocked and yelled again. After waiting “five or ten seconds,” he turned the handle and pushed open the door. Upon entering the residence he saw petitioner and Mr. Brown in a sleeping loft: petitioner was sitting on the bed unclad and Brown was asleep.

Evidence seized in the ensuing search was admitted over objection at the preliminary hearing. The magistrate ruled that there had been a reasonable and proper entrance. The superior court denied petitioner’s motion to set aside the information pursuant to section 995…

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.