Newell

People v. Newell

Good Law
155 Cal. Rptr. 430·1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 1746·93 Cal. App. 3d 29
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 1979Crim. No. 17994; Crim. No. 18009California2,963 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Elkington, J.

Defendants George Anthony Hadzima, Jr., Donald James Newell, and William Edward Donohue pleaded guilty to several counts of burglary following the superior court’s denial of their Penal Code section 1538.5 motion to suppress evidence essential to their successful prosecution, and which led to their arrests and guilty pleas. Hadzima appeals from a judgment under which he was sentenced to state prison. Newell and Donohue, jointly represented by other counsel, appeal from orders granting probation conditioned upon six months of county jail confinement. We have consolidated the appeals for hearing and determination.

Our conclusion, for the reasons which now follow, is that the superior court did not err in denying the motion to suppress, and that the respective judgment and orders granting probation must be affirmed.

The relevant evidence is uncontroverted.

Defendant Hadzima was the proprietor of “Touch of Class,” a clothing store in Thousand Oaks, Ventura County, California. In the early part of June 1977, he separately approached the proprietors of similar stores called “James Fine Men’s Apparel,” “Famous Fashions,” and “Madd Hatter” of a Contra Costa County shopping…

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.