United States v. Mark Samuel Richardson

Bad Law
849 F.2d 439·1988 WL 59382·1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8049
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 198887-5252California1,603 words

Opinion

Opinion

Goodwin, J.

Mark Samuel Richardson timely appeals from his conditional plea of guilty to one count of theft of government property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 . We affirm.

In April 1987, Detective Mumma of the Corona Police Department began to suspect that Richardson was involved in a service station burglary. Mumma knew that another detective was seeking an arrest warrant for Richardson regarding an older case in Riverside County. Mumma further discovered that Richardson was on parole in both Orange and Riverside counties.

Mumma contacted both of Richardson’s probation officers. Carolyn Frazier, Richardson’s Riverside probation officer, told Mumma that Richardson was in violation of his probation in Riverside County and also in Orange County. Mumma asked Frazier if there was a search condition attached to Richardson’s probation and indicated that he was interested in conducting a search pursuant to the search condition if Frazier agreed. Frazier told Mumma that there was a search condition, and gave her permission to Mumma to conduct a probation search when Mumma arrested Richardson.

Mumma also contacted Deborah Bash-ara, Richardson’s Orange County probation officer. Bashara referred…

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.