Hinds

People v. Hinds

Good Law
108 Cal. App. 4th 897·134 Cal. Rptr. 2d 196·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 729·2003 Daily Journal DAR 5243·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4107
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2003C040999California1,300 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

After the preliminary hearing magistrate denied his motion to suppress evidence, defendant Joshua Lynn Hinds entered a negotiated plea of guilty to one count of cultivating marijuana in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11358. On appeal, defendant seeks review of the magistrate’s ruling. We conclude that defendant has waived his right to appeal by failing to renew his suppression motion before the trial judge. We shall therefore affirm the judgment.

Background

On July 11, 2001, after a combined preliminary hearing and hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress evidence, the magistrate denied defendant’s motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5. Defendant was thereafter held to answer on the criminal complaint that was filed May 15, 2000.

On July 16, 2001, the District Attorney of Shasta County filed an information charging defendant in count 1 with conspiracy to commit one or more of the following crimes (Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1)), sale or transportation of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360), possession of marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359), and cultivating marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11358); in count 2…

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.