Gutierrez

People v. Gutierrez

Good Law
124 Cal. App. 4th 1481·21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 926
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 2005B169161California693 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

In this criminal action the magistrate granted defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. (Pen. Code, § 1538.5.) The prosecution successfully moved to reinstate the complaint pursuant to section 871.5. To challenge the validity of the search on appeal, must defendant first make a suppression motion before the superior court? No. Once the door has been shut on defendant, he is not required to knock again. He need not perform a useless act to preserve his right to appeal.

Peter Gutierrez appeals his conviction after a guilty plea to one count of possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and one count of forgery (§ 475, subd. (b)). Although Gutierrez may challenge the ruling on his search and seizure motion, we conclude it was constitutionally valid and affirm.

[[/]]

DISCUSSION

I

The Attorney General contends that Gutierrez is procedurally barred from challenging the validity of the search and seizure.

The Attorney General does not contest that when the issue is properly preserved in the trial court, a defendant may seek review of the validity of the search and seizure on appeal from his conviction after a plea of guilty. (§ 1538.5,…

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.