People v. Stewart

California Court of Appeal Sep 21, 1956 No. Crim. 1086Published

Before: Mussell

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the search and seizure of narcotics paraphernalia were lawful because the initial entry was consensual, the defendant subsequently consented to a search, and the evidence was seized incident to a lawful arrest.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence obtained during a search of the defendant's residence.
Whether the search and seizure of narcotics paraphernalia constituted an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The evidence shows that the search was made with the defendant’s consent and therefore was not unreasonable.”

“It is immaterial that the seizure of the paraphernalia used in the commission of the crime may have preceded rather than followed the arrest.”

“It is well settled that a search without a warrant is valid where it is incident to a lawful arrest, if it is reasonable and made in good faith”

MUSSELL, J.

Defendant was charged in an information with having furnished narcotics to a minor in violation of section 11714 of the Health and Safety Code, a felony, in that on or about the 22d day of January, 1956, in said county of San Diego, he did “wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously furnish or administer and give to Nancy Cook, who was then and there a minor of the age of 17 years, a narcotic.” Trial was had by the court without a jury and defendant was found guilty of the offense charged in the information. His motion for a new trial and his application for probation were denied and he was sentenced to the state prison for the time prescribed

[557]

by law. He appeals from the judgment and from the order denying his motion for a new trial. His sole contention is that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence certain exhibits on the ground that they were obtained by unlawful search and seizure.

A summary of the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People

(People

Spreckels,

125 Cal.App.2d 507, 509 [270 P.2d 513]), is as follows: On January 22, 1956, at about 6 p. m., Nancy Cook, aged 17, met the defendant at a hamburger stand in San Diego. She then went with the defendant to his residence at 2887 Boston Avenue, arriving there at about 7 p. m. Bn route, Nancy and the defendant discussed narcotics and Nancy informed the defendant she would like some heroin. After listening to some records in defendant’s residence, they went into the bathroom where the defendant had a glass of water, a paper containing a brownish-white powder, a lighter, an eyedropper, a needle and a silver spoon. He cut the brownish-white powder with a knife and placed the substance on a silver spoon, then used cotton as a means of adding water to the substance in the spoon, heated the spoon with the lighter, drew liquid from it into the eyedropper and attached the needle to the dropper. He then took a belt from the doorknob on the bathroom door and placed it around his arm, inserting the needle into his arm. He then put the belt around Nancy Cook’s right arm and inserted the needle in her arm three times, after which he placed the belt around her left arm and inserted the needle in it four times, injecting fluid into her arms. Fifteen minutes after these injections Nancy felt slightly nauseous and in 45 minutes she felt drowsy. She and the defendant again listened to some records and waited for another girl (Chris McCracken) to arrive. Chris then returned and the two girls went out to get something to eat, after which Nancy returned to her home.

People v. Stewart

AI Brief

MUSSELL, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief