Poole

People v. Poole

Good Law
182 Cal. App. 3d 1004·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1767·227 Cal. Rptr. 594
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 1986H000603California4,130 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brauer, J.

In the court below appellant William Eugene Poole made contemporaneous motions to set aside an information and to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, §§ 995 and 1538.5). His motions were denied, and thereafter he pled guilty to a charge of selling cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352). His appeal is authorized by the provisions of subdivision (m) of Penal Code section 1538.5, and by People v. Lilienthal (1978) 22 Cal.3d 891, 897 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 910 , 587 P.2d 706 ].)

On appeal Poole contends (1) that the warrantless entry of his apartment by peace officers was unlawful, and (2) that all evidence obtained thereafter—including his own confession—was “fruit of the poisonous tree,” and should have been suppressed. A review of the record leads us to agree, and we therefore reverse.

I.

On December 4, 1984, at approximately 5:30 p.m., a military police investigator made a telephone call from Fort Ord to a certain number in Salinas. A man answered the call. After some discussion the man agreed to sell the investigator two grams of cocaine for $200. The man directed the investigator to drive to a certain 7-Eleven store in Salinas, and told him to call again from there. According to…

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.