Lindsey

People v. Lindsey

Good Law
148 Cal. App. 4th 1390·56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 619
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 2007A113628California4,356 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sepulveda, J.

Jamar Lindsey appeals from a conviction following his no contest plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm. He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5 to suppress evidence seized after a 911 call reported that a shot had been fired close to where Lindsey ultimately was detained and searched. We afBrm the judgment.

Factual And Procedural Background

About 9:30 p.m. on November 9, 2004, Pittsburg police dispatch received a 911 hang-up call that was traced to a residence on West Boulevard, a residential street. A few minutes later, dispatch received information from an anonymous female 911 caller that there was a shot fired outside that residence. According to the dispatch log, dispatch received the same telephone number, as well as a specific address and apartment unit, associated with the 911 calls. The log states that the caller “does not want contact” and “didn’t see [the suspect] fire a gun or hold one.”

Pittsburg Police Officer Charles Blazer was dispatched to the residence on West Boulevard after the report of a shot fired. A dispatcher told Blazer that the suspect was a Black male with small ponytails.…

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.