People v. Chamaki CA5

Filed 9/8/25 P. v. Chamaki CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F088345 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20CR-04903) v.

RAMAN YOUSEF CHAMAKI, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. Mark V. Bacciarini, Judge. Cynthia L. Barnes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Kimberley A. Donohue, Assistant Attorney General, Ian Whitney, and Hannah Janigian Chavez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, A.P. J., Detjen, J. and Fain, J.† † Judge of the Fresno Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Defendant Raman Yousef Chamaki’s residence was searched, methamphetamine was found, and he was charged with transporting methamphetamine with intent to sell or furnishing methamphetamine. Defendant filed a motion for unsealing of the affidavit in support of the search warrant, which was denied. Defendant subsequently pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell. On appeal, defendant asks us to independently review the sealed affidavit, the search warrant, and related orders to determine: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to unseal the affidavit; (2) whether the sealed affidavit contains material misrepresentations or missions; and (3) whether the sealed affidavit supports a finding of probable cause. As the court erred in denying defendant’s motion to unseal the affidavit, we conditionally reverse the judgment and direct the court to reconsider the motion. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On February 23, 2022, the Merced County district attorney filed an information charging defendant with transporting methamphetamine with intent to sell or furnishing methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a); count 1). On February 24, 2023, defendant filed a motion for unsealing and disclosure of the affidavit in support of the search warrant. The district attorney opposed the motion and requested an in camera hearing. On September 13, 2023, the trial court held an in camera hearing on the motion, denied it, and ordered that the transcript of the hearing be sealed. On June 21, 2024, defendant pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378). On that same day, defendant was sentenced to 270 days in county jail plus two years of formal felony probation. On June 21, 2024, defendant timely filed a notice of appeal, and the trial court granted his request for a certificate of probable cause.