Fleming

People v. Fleming

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 178·22 Cal. App. 4th 1566·28 Cal. Rptr. 2d 78·94 Daily Journal DAR 2712·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1588
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1994B074599California2,665 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nott, J.

a trial court may require an applicant for drug diversion to submit to reasonable, but warrantless, searches as a condition of his diversion program. We reluctantly conclude that under the law as currently interpreted, it may not do so.

Appellant Victoria Fleming was charged in count I with possession for sale of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) and in count II with possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). It was also alleged that she was personally armed with a firearm during the commission of the foregoing violations (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (c)). She pled guilty to both counts and no contest to the special allegation.

Contentions

Appellant contends (1) the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress on the ground that the arresting officer conducted an invalid, warrantless search, (2) insufficient evidence supported the finding of consent, and (3) the good faith exclusionary rule does not apply to the facts of this case.

Facts

At appellant’s preliminary hearing, Detective Neil Hopkins testified that on March 27, 1992, he went to appellant’s residence after receiving complaints that she had been…

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.