People v. Watts CA3

Filed 2/18/25 P. v. Watts CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099754

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 22FE010594)

v.

DEONDRE ANTHONY WATTS,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Deondre Anthony Watts guilty of two counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm after police discovered firearms during a search of his car. On appeal, Watts contends that the trial court erred in denying his suppression motion because the search violated his constitutional rights. He also effectively argues that the abstract of judgment incorrectly lists his restitution fine. We will direct the trial court to amend the abstract of judgment to accurately reflect the restitution fine imposed and will otherwise affirm the judgment.

1

BACKGROUND A jury found Watts guilty of two counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1))1 based on evidence that officers discovered a semiautomatic firearm and a revolver during a traffic stop. Before trial, Watts moved to suppress this evidence under section 1538.5. In his motion, Watts argued that the search of his car was illegal because it was conducted without a warrant. Watts explained that “[u]nder the pretext of an inventory search, the officers illegally searched [him] for the purpose of gathering evidence to use against [him] in a criminal case.” He also noted that “[t]he decision to impound [his] vehicle must be justified by a community caretaking function ‘other than suspicion of evidence of criminal activity’ because inventory searches are conducted in the absence of probable cause.” At the suppression hearing, Officer Reynaldo Garcia-Barron testified that on June 26, 2022, he observed a silver sedan driving 90 to 95 miles per hour in an area where the speed limit was 65 miles per hour. Officer Garcia-Barron activated his lights and siren and the sedan pulled over. The sedan remained partially in the driving lane when it stopped and thus was obstructing other vehicles on the roadway. Officer Garcia- Barron identified Watts as the sedan’s driver. After the officer smelled alcohol and observed Watts’s red and watery eyes, he directed him out of the car and patted him down for weapons. Watts answered some of Officer Garcia-Barron’s questions but was unwilling to submit to field sobriety tests. Officer Garcia-Barron arrested Watts under suspicion of driving under the influence. Officer Garcia-Barron could not recall how long the stop lasted. Officer Garcia-Barron testified that he proceeded to have Watts’s car towed because it was blocking the roadway and he did not want to leave the car to be