Coffee

People v. Coffee

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 3d 28·165 Cal. Rptr. 676
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 1980Docket Nos. 35724, 35356California1,958 words

Opinion

Opinion

Compton, J.

Defendants Coffee and Shirley Faye James pleaded guilty to the crime of first degree robbery. Coffee admitted to an allegation that he had used a firearm in the commission of the offense.

As a part of a plea bargain, an allegation that defendant Coffee had suffered two prior felony convictions for burglary and grand theft from the person, were struck from the information. As to defendant James, the allegation of use of a firearm was struck as was an allegation that she had suffered prior convictions for burglary and aiding and abetting a bank robbery. It also appears that the bargain included a promise by the district attorney not to file an additional unrelated felony charge against Coffee.

On appeal defendants present only one issue of arguable merit and that is that the trial court erred in refusing to suppress certain evidence which police officers retrieved from a motel at which defendants were staying at the time of their arrest. They contend that their pleas of guilty were the result of that ruling.

At the hearing held in the superior court pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5, subdivision (i), defendants moved to suppress a hat, a shirt and a black leather…

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.