People v. Salcedo CA2/6

DISCUSSION

The trial court did not err when it denied Salcedo’s motion to suppress. Substantial evidence supports its findings that Yvonne consented to the initial sweep of her room and the subsequent search was pursuant to a valid warrant. (People v. Jenkins (2000) 22 Cal.4th 900, 971-972 [a warrantless search may be reasonable when a person other than defendant with authority over the premises voluntarily consents to the search].) Salcedo forfeited any right to DNA testing when he thrice refused to submit to it, defying a court order. The trial court acted within its discretion when it denied his untimely request. Salcedo’s claim that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance is not supported by a showing that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, or a reasonable probability that he would have obtained a more favorable result but for counsel's deficient performance. (Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694.) Counsel’s decision not to cross-examine a detective about Calles’ failure to identify Salcedo in a photographic lineup was reasonable since the prosecution did not use Calles’s statements to prove identity.…