P.
P. v. McQueen CA4/1
Opinion
Opinion
Irion, J.
DISCUSSION
A. The Trial Court Properly Denied the Motion to Suppress
McQueen contends that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress the
evidence of the contents of the sunglasses case and the money in his pockets, arguing that
(1) the evidence of the narcotics contained in the sunglasses case was obtained pursuant
3 to an illegal search, and (2) the discovery of the money in McQueen's pockets in a search
incident to arrest for narcotics possession was the fruit of the same illegal search.
1. Standard of Review
" ' "An appellate court's review of a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress is
governed by well-settled principles. [Citations.] [¶] In ruling on such a motion, the trial
court (1) finds the historical facts, (2) selects the applicable rule of law, and (3) applies
the latter to the former to determine whether the rule of law as applied to the established
facts is or is not violated. [Citations.] 'The [trial] court's resolution of each of these
inquiries is, of course, subject to appellate review.' [Citations.] [¶] The court's
resolution of the first inquiry, which involves questions of fact,…