People v. Goodo

California Court of Appeal Dec 17, 1956 No. Crim. 5729Published

Before: Fox

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an arrest and subsequent search based solely on information from an unreliable, non-confidential informant and the observation of the defendant carrying an innocuous paper sack lacked reasonable or probable cause.

Issues

Whether information from an unverified informant, combined with the observation of a defendant carrying a common paper bag, constitutes reasonable cause for an arrest.
Whether the circumstances of the arrest constituted a 'pressing emergency' justifying a warrantless search.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In the absence of any emergency, “an arrest may not be based solely on such information.””

“It is therefore apparent that no incriminating significance can reasonably be attached to the fact that appellant was carrying a brown paper sack in his right hand.”

“It is now settled that a search cannot be justified by what it produces.”

[8]

FOX, J.

Appellant challenges his conviction of the possession of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11500) on the grounds that his arrest was without reasonable or probable

cause;

that the search was therefore unlawful; and that the evidence thus seized, on which his conviction was based, was inadmissible. We have concluded that his position is well taken.

Ón March 18, 1956, at approximately 9:30 p. m., Police Officers Blankenship and Ward stopped a Mr. Bruce for interrogation on the corner of 29th Street and Vermont Avenue in Los Angeles. He told them that he lived at 1201 West 30th Street and volunteered the information that a certain person occupying quarters in the same apartment building in which he lived had a pound of marijuana in his room and that this person would be home about 11 p. m.

Bruce was not a confidential informant. The officers had never had any previous dealings with him. They had never seen him before and knew nothing of his past record or reliability. They had not had appellant under surveillance prior to this time.

Acting on this information, the officers proceeded to 1201 West 30th Street, arriving at approximately 10:15 p. m. Bruce let them into the community kitchen, which was adjacent to a hallway leading to appellant’s room in the rear of the building. The officers peeped out the door and ob-observed appellant and one Miller enter appellant’s room. Both men were empty handed. Some five minutes later the officers walked down the hallway to appellant’s room and were about to knock when appellant opened the door. Officer Blankenship observed appellant was carrying a brown paper sack in his right hand in such manner that it could be disposed of rapidly. The officer testified that marijuana is usually carried in bulk in this kind of a sack but on two occasions, at least, he had observed it carried in a different fashion. The officer arrested appellant and seized the paper sack. It contained marijuana. The officers had neither a search warrant nor a warrant for appellant’s arrest.

People

People v. Goodo

AI Brief

FOX, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief