Moreno

People v. Moreno

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 33·2 Cal. App. 4th 577·3 Cal. Rptr. 2d 66·92 Daily Journal DAR 326·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 330
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 8, 1992F014967California3,968 words

Opinion

Opinion

Acting, J.

In this case we address a question not previously answered in California: Does a baby-sitter have standing to move to suppress the items seized at the place and during the time the baby-sitter sits? We answer the question affirmatively.

The Case

An information charged Lorenzo Patino Moreno with offering to sell, conspiracy to sell, and possession for sale of cocaine; it alleged he was armed with a firearm in the commission of the first two crimes. The defense filed a motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5), which the trial court denied. Thereafter a jury convicted Moreno of all counts and found true the armed allegations.

The Facts

Our review is limited to those matters before the trial court—Moreno’s “Notice of Motion and Motion to Suppress” and accompanying points and authorities, the People’s “Response in Opposition to Motion to Suppress Evidence,” and brief testimony and argument presented at the hearing on the motion. Both the points and authorities and the response contained facts drawn from the preliminary examination transcript. However, the transcript itself was not introduced into evidence, Moreno having refused to stipulate to its use.

The motion…

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.