People v. Guillen CA5

DISCUSSION

The Motion to Suppress Was Properly Denied Defendant initially contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the prosecution failed to produce any evidence at the hearing on the motion to suppress regarding the validity of Spain’s search of the suitcase. While we agree there was a failure of proof in this case, we find it was defendant’s burden to establish the impropriety of the initial search. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence against him, claiming “the affidavit in support of the search warrant … was deficient.” As relevant to the issue presented on appeal, defendant contended the suitcase had been turned over by Spain, “himself a California law enforcement employee, but without any warrant or other legal authority to do so. This was an illegal seizure by a gainfully employed California law enforcement officer, subsequently improperly ratified later by the Porterville Police Department.” Defendant appended a copy of the search warrant and the affidavit in support of the warrant to his motion. The People opposed the motion, arguing initially the exclusionary rule was not implicated here as the suitcase was not searched by a law…