Roman

People v. Roman

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 119·227 Cal. App. 3d 674·278 Cal. Rptr. 44·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1123
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 8, 1991B048700California2,014 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stone, J.

The issue presented is whether either Vehicle Code section 2805 or the landlord’s consent to enter the leased premises satisfied the People’s burden of justifying a warrantless search and seizure. We find that neither ground asserted justified the search and seizure and affirm the order of dismissal.

The People appeal, pursuant to Penal Code section 1238, subdivision (a)(7), from a dismissal on the court’s motion based on an order suppressing evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5.

Defendants Jose Ornelas Roman and Roberto Pacheco were charged with one count of receiving stolen property, i.e., Peterbilt truck parts, in violation of section 496, subdivision 1. When the trial court granted defendants’ motion to suppress evidence under section 1538.5, the People were unable to proceed, and the trial court dismissed the case.

Testimony at the hearing on defendants’ motion to suppress established that Friday, August 4, 1989, defendants spoke to Vincente Medrano about leasing space in a commercial warehouse to replace the engine on their truck, which, according to them, they could not do on their own premises. Mr. Medrano told them they could have space in “the big room”…

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.