People v. Murphy

California Court of Appeal Jul 10, 1980 No. Crim. 11523Published

Before: Hamrick

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a five-minute warrant check conducted during a traffic stop was lawful under the legal standards in effect at the time of the arrest, and that the subsequent rule established in People v. McGaughran does not apply retroactively.

Issues

Whether a five-minute detention for a warrant check during a traffic stop was lawful under California law at the time of the incident.
Whether the rule established in the second opinion of People v. McGaughran regarding warrant check duration should be applied retroactively.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“To the extent the second opinion in McGaughran announces a new rule prescribing a maximum time limit for the duration of a detention for routine warrant checks, it would not apply to this case unless given retroactive effect.”

Opinion

HAMRICK, J.

Defendant Michael Harold Murphy was convicted in superior court of possessing a controlled substance (Health & Saf.

[477]

Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) based upon a negotiated plea of guilty following a denial of his motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5. Imposition of sentence was suspended and Murphy was placed on probation for three years. Murphy appeals his conviction contending the court erred in refusing to suppress the contraband which was found on his person pursuant to a search by the arresting officer.

Facts

At approximately 1:30 a.m. on February 28, 1979, San Diego Police Officer Ray Bowling was on duty when he saw a Plymouth station wagon pull out of a downtown parking lot and go north on Third Avenue. He noticed the station wagon did not have a front license plate and the rear Massachusetts license plate did not have a current validation sticker. Bowling followed the station wagon for a few blocks while he ran a radio check to see if the vehicle was reported as stolen. He learned it was not. When the station wagon turned onto E Street, Bowling stopped it. Upon request, the driver, Murphy, produced a valid Nevada driver’s license; however, he was unable to find the vehicle registration card. When he was asked who owned the vehicle, Murphy stated it belonged to a friend of his girl friend, but he did not know the name of this person.

Because the vehicle was an out-of-state vehicle, not currently registered and Murphy had a Nevada driver’s license, Bowling decided to run a warrant check on Murphy. The warrant check took only a few minutes, not more than five minutes, and revealed an outstanding warrant for Murphy with bail set at $75 on a dangerous drug possession charge. Bowling asked Murphy if he had $75 to pay the bail, and when Murphy said no, he was arrested. The arrest was followed by a search which produced the unlawful contraband.

Murphy contends the detention for purposes of a warrant check exceeded the permissible time limit established by the California Supreme Court in

People v. Murphy

AI Brief

HAMRICK, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief