Hill
People v. Hill
Opinion
Opinion
Corrigan, J.
Defendant appeals following a conviction for receiving stolen property. He contends, among other things, that the search of his motel room was unlawful because the police were unaware of his probation search condition. After we affirmed this conviction (People v. Hill (Mar. 28, 2003, A097724) [nonpub. opn.]), the California Supreme Court granted review and held the matter pending its decision in People v. Sanders (2003) 31 Cal.4th 318 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.3d 630 , 73 P.3d 496 ] (Sanders). The Supreme Court then transferred the case back to us with directions to vacate our decision and reconsider the cause in light of Sanders . We again conclude the search was lawful and affirm the judgment.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Following a plea agreement, defendant’s girlfriend Jamie Gregory testified that on March 17, 2001, defendant asked her to help him burglarize the home of her friend Patricia Bond. When Gregory refused, defendant struck her in the face with an auto part, breaking her nose. Defendant took her to the emergency room, where Gregory told the triage nurse that she was struck with a metal baseball bat while trying to break up a fight.