Hester

People v. Hester

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 4th 376·14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 377·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 883·2004 Daily Journal DAR 6951·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5055
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 10, 2004F034897California22,675 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Cornell, J.

*382 Opinion

Dontee Tyree Hester was arrested after the vehicle in which he was riding was stopped by Bakersfield police officers who believed the vehicle might be involved in criminal activity related to the criminal street gang known as the East Side Crips. The officers found a loaded firearm in the vehicle. After the trial court denied his motion to suppress, Hester pled guilty to conspiracy to possess a firearm. (Pen. Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 12031, subd. (a)(2)(C).)

In our original opinion, we reversed the judgment because we concluded the officers did not have probable cause to stop the vehicle and, therefore, the trial court erred in denying Hester’s motion to suppress.

The Supreme Court granted review on March 13, 2002, S102961. On January 14, 2004, the case was transferred back to this court with instructions to vacate our decision and reconsider the matter in light of Maryland v. Pringle (2003) 540 U.S. 366 [ 157 L.Ed.2d 769 , 124 S.Ct. 795 ], and People v. Sanders (2003) 31 Cal.4th 318 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.3d 630 , 73 P.3d 496 ].

We have received supplemental briefing from the parties and reviewed the authority cited in the transfer order. We conclude that Maryland v.…

Dissenting Opinion

Buckley, J.

I respectfully dissent.

I must acknowledge that in the first opinion in this case prior to remand, I had concurred in the majority. However, upon a re-review of the facts and the applicable law, I am convinced I was wrong, as is the present majority.

*406 Drawing from the facts as set forth by the majority and cognizant of certain additional and significant facts not set forth, I conclude there was a reasonable suspicion to detain the vehicle.

Officer Carmesco testified that he had contacted Leon Anderson on at least five occasions previously. On each occasion, he was in the company of admitted East Side Crips gang members. Moreover, he testified the driving pattern occurred for a distance of over one-half mile. Officer Heredia testified that he saw the three vehicles in a very tight formation criss-cross each other in the different lanes while maintaining their group.

It would appear obvious that the drivers (and occupants) of the vehicles knew each other and were driving in tandem. Given Officer Carmesco’s expertise as a street gang expert, his familiarity with the East Side Crips and his knowledge of Anderson’s proclivity to associate primarily, if not exclusively, with…

Opinion

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

Dontee Tyree Hester was arrested after the vehicle in which he was riding was stopped by Bakersfield police officers who believed the vehicle might be involved in criminal activity related to the criminal street gang known as the East Side Crips. The officers found a loaded firearm in the vehicle. After the trial court denied his motion to suppress, Hester pled guilty to conspiracy to possess a firearm. (Pen.Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 12031, subd. (a)(2)(C).) [1]

In our original opinion, we reversed the judgment because we concluded the officers did not have probable cause to stop the vehicle and, therefore, the trial court erred in denying Hester's motion to suppress.

The Supreme Court granted review on March 13, 2002, S102961. On January 14, 2004, the case was transferred back to this court with instructions to vacate our decision and reconsider the matter in light of Maryland v. Pringle (2003) 540 U.S. 366 , 124 S.Ct. 795 , 157 L.Ed.2d 769 , and People v. Sanders (2003) 31 Cal.4th 318 , 2 Cal.Rptr.3d 630 , 73 P.3d 496 .

We have received supplemental briefing from the parties and reviewed the authority cited in the…

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.