Armstrong
People v. Armstrong
Opinion
Opinion
Peterson, J.
—George Eugene Armstrong appeals from a judgment of conviction following a jury verdict finding him guilty of possession of cocaine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350.) He claims his conviction must be reversed because the trial court erred when it denied his Penal Code section 995 (section 995) motion. Appellant also maintains the trial court improperly denied his request for probation.
In affirming, we will hold that the “good-faith exception” enunciated in United States v. Leon (1984) 468 U.S. 897, 922-925 [ 82 L.Ed.2d 677, 698-700 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 ], relied on to validate an arrest, does not relieve the prosecution, on defense demand therefor, of the necessity of proving that the arrest warrant information furnished to the arresting officer and justifying the arrest was not falsely manufactured. On reexamining People v. Romanoski (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 353 [ 204 Cal.Rptr. 33 ], we will further hold that the means of proving such arrest warrant information was not falsely manufactured is not exclusively limited to production of the original arrest warrant or a certified copy thereof.