Mayo

People v. Mayo

Good Law
185 Cal. App. 3d 389·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2008·229 Cal. Rptr. 762
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 1986B010948California3,011 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

Defendant Marvin Jack Mayo appeals from a judgment of conviction following a guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to manufacture phencyclidine (PCP). (Health & Saf. Code, § 11383, subd. (b); count IV.) Defendant contends that (1) Penal Code section 1387 bars reinstatement under section 871.5 of a twice dismissed complaint; (2) the superior court failed to find the dismissal to be error as a matter of law as required for reinstatement under section 871.5; and (3) certain evidence presented at the preliminary hearing should have been suppressed (§ 1538.5) and the information should have been dismissed (§§ 995, 1387). We conclude that section 1387 does not bar reinstatement, pursuant to section 871.5, of a twice dismissed complaint, and that the superior court properly found the dismissal to be erroneous as a matter of law and properly denied the motion to suppress evidence and dismiss the information. Affirmed.

I

Factual and Procedural Background

In late December 1982, Officer Newsham, Supervisor of the Vice/Narcotics Division of the Burbank Police Department, received a tip from informant Wunderlin, a known drug user familiar with PCP, that defendant…

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.