Hoeninghaus
People v. Hoeninghaus
Opinion
Opinion
Rushing, J.
INTRODUCTION
The Fourth Amendment proscribes all unreasonable searches and seizures, and it is settled that warrantless searches are per se unreasonable unless they come within an established exception to the warrant requirement. (Mincey v. Arizona (1978) 437 U.S. 385, 390 [ 57 L.Ed.2d 290 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 ].) A search by police under an adult probationer’s search condition comes within an exception. (See People v. Woods (1999) 21 Cal.4th 668, 674-675 [ 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 88 , 981 P.2d 1019 ].) In this case, we hold that the exception is inapplicable if police are unaware of the probation search condition at the time of a warrantless search.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Defendant Brian Keith Hoeninghaus appeals from a judgment entered after he pleaded no contest to possession of heroin. He claims the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence obtained from him during a warrantless search of his person and car. (Pen. Code, §§ 1538.5 & 1237.5.) We agree and reverse the judgment.
BACKGROUND
The Warrantless Search
On November 1, 2002, around 11:40 a.m., Officer Terry Parker of the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Department and two deputies were conducting a…