People v. Tipton CA3
Filed 7/24/24 P. v. Tipton CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Placer) ----
THE PEOPLE, C099218
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 62187257)
v.
TIMOTHY RAY TIPTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
After denial of his motion to suppress, defendant Timothy Ray Tipton, in exchange for an eight-year prison sentence, pleaded no contest to transportation of methamphetamine for sale, transportation of heroin, two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, and unlawful possession of ammunition. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We affirm.
1
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 7, 2022, defendant was charged in a complaint with transportation of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code,1 § 11379, subd. (a); count one), possession of methamphetamine for sale (§ 11378; count two), transportation of heroin (§ 11352, subd. (a); count three), possession of heroin for sale (§ 11351; count four), possession and sale of ketamine (§ 11379.2; count five), possession of methamphetamine while armed with a firearm (§ 11370.1, subd. (a); count six), three counts of possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1); counts seven, eight, and nine), and unlawful possession of ammunition (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1), count ten). The complaint alleged numerous circumstances in aggravation under California Rules of Court, rule 4.421. On October 7, 2022, defendant filed a motion to suppress under Penal Code section 1538.5. On the same day, Officer Bryan Gore testified at a combined preliminary hearing and hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress. On September 1, 2022, Gore was working as a police officer for the City of Rocklin. About 11:00 p.m., Gore observed a man and a woman walking toward a Ford Mustang in the parking lot of a hotel. Gore did not see them carrying anything. The woman got in the driver’s side, and the man got in the passenger side. Gore conducted a license plate check of the Mustang and found that it was registered to Megan Dilg, who was on probation. When the Mustang got to the front of the hotel, Gore waved, and the driver stopped. Gore did not shine a white light or activate his overhead lights. Gore approached the driver. Defendant was in the passenger seat. Gore explained that the registered owner of the vehicle was on probation and asked the driver if she was the owner, Megan Dilg. The driver said she had purchased the car from a female. At
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)