Gomez

People v. Gomez

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 4th 1008·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1030·2005 Daily Journal DAR 7942·30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 662·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5796
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 29, 2005C044621California2,941 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hull, J.

The People appeal from the dismissal of an information charging defendant with receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a); further unspecified section references are to the Penal Code.) The trial court decided the property seized from defendant’s residence had to be suppressed because it was discovered during the course of an illegal search.

Specifically, although defendant had given consent to the search of his residence for guns, firearms, or narcotics in return for a grant of probation following an earlier offense, the court (understandably, given case law existing at the time of the motion to suppress) found the search illegal because the officer’s subjective intent was to search for stolen property. We hold the search was lawful because defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place where the property was found. The officer’s subjective purpose for the search did not make the search illegal. We reverse the judgment.

Facts .and Proceedings

On September 16, 2002, Stockton Police Officer Thomas Walters went to an antiques store after the owner of the store called police to report that a man was trying to sell him antiques stolen…

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.