Tolliver

People v. Tolliver

Good Law
160 Cal. App. 4th 1231·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 353·73 Cal. Rptr. 3d 375
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2008C049959California3,468 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

Defendants Jason Tolliver and Antonio Villasenor were involved in a large-scale drug trafficking enterprise. Convicted by jury and sentenced to state prison, they each appeal. In the published portion of this opinion, we conclude that Villasenor did not have a legitimate privacy interest in his vehicle because he disassociated himself from the vehicle to avoid having it connected to him in the event it was stopped during its use in the drug trafficking. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we find no merit in Villasenor’s remaining contentions. As to Tolliver, however, we conclude, also in the unpublished portion of the opinion, that his sentence must be reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial concerning whether one of his prior convictions was for a serious felony.

PROCEDURE

By indictment and later amendments to the indictment, Tolliver and Villasenor were charged, along with 13 others. The counts applicable to Tolliver and Villasenor were as follows:

An amendment to the indictment further alleged that Tolliver was convicted of two prior serious felonies: a 1992 conviction for brandishing a firearm against a person in a motor vehicle and a 1992…

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.