Coblentz

People v. Coblentz

Good Law
1964 Cal. App. LEXIS 986·229 Cal. App. 2d 296·40 Cal. Rptr. 116
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 19, 1964Crim. 8913California1,971 words

Opinion

Opinion

Files, J.

This is a prosecution for possession of heroin for sale, in violation of Health and Safety Code, section 11500.5. Defendant personally and by Ms attorney waived a jury trial. It was then stipulated that the ease be submitted to the trial court upon the transcript of the preliminary hearing. No evidence was offered on behalf of the defendant, either at the preliminary or at the trial. The court found defendant guilty. He has appealed from the judgment and has attempted to appeal from the order denying his motion for a new trial, which is a nonappealable order. (Pen. Code, § 1237.)

The sole point argued by defendant on tMs appeal is that the People’s case is based upon an illegal search. The Attorney General points out that defendant did not object to the admission of any of the evidence received against Mm at the trial. The deputy public defender who represented defendant at the preliminary hearing did make timely objections based upon the claimed illegality of the search, which objections were overruled by the magistrate. The attorney chosen by defendant to represent Mm at the trial stipulated that all this evidence be received, without any exception or reservation or objection.…

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.