People v. Barnard CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 4, 2015G049319California4,932 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant David Barnard appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of possessing methamphetamine for sale, transporting methamphetamine, possessing heroin for sale, and transporting heroin. We affirm. Each of Barnard’s contentions of error is without merit. In summary: (1) even if Barnard’s statement admitting that a cell phone belonged to him should have been excluded under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda), such error was harmless; (2) substantial evidence supported each of Barnard’s convictions; (3) the court did not err by admitting text messages observed by a police officer on a cell phone found during a search of Barnard’s car; (4) the court did not err by excluding evidence of the gang rape and beating Barnard had allegedly suffered while incarcerated a few years before trial; and (5) the court did not err in refusing to grant Barnard’s request for a split sentence which would have included drug treatment time.

FACTS

At 11:37 p.m. on January 27, 2013, Officer Timothy Emanuel of the Huntington Beach Police Department was assisting a fellow officer in conducting a traffic stop when he noticed a Nissan parked across 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.