People v. Aguilar

California Court of Appeal Mar 5, 1985 No. A026163Published

Before: Low

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the destruction of the cardboard box did not violate the defendant's due process rights because the box lacked apparent exculpatory value, and the search of the defendant's person was a valid search incident to a lawful arrest.

Issues

Whether the destruction of the cardboard box by law enforcement required the suppression of testimony regarding its condition under People v. Hitch.
Whether the search of the defendant's person following the discovery of contraband was a lawful search incident to arrest.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The cardboard box did not possess “an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed.””

“Therefore, the loss or destruction of this evidence while in police custody does not impinge on defendant’s Fourteenth Amendment due process rights”

“the opening of defendant’s wallet and seizure of methamphetamine were justified as a search for contraband incident to defendant’s lawful, custodial arrest.”

Opinion

LOW, P. J.

After his motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5 was denied, defendant pled guilty to transportation of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379) and transportation of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360, subd. (a)). On appeal, he challenges the trial court order denying his motion to suppress. We affirm.

On the evening of December 21, 1982, San Jose Police Officers Mc-Courtie and Hewitt saw defendant in a black Porsche abruptly change lanes without signaling. This traffic violation caused a near collision with another car. They stopped defendant’s car to issue a citation. While Officer Hewitt, on the driver’s side, asked defendant for his driver’s license and Officer McCourtie surveyed the car’s interior from the passenger side with a flashlight “for possible weapons,” he saw a large half-full bottle of Riunite wine “in plain view” lying behind the front passenger seat. Defendant was then asked to step outside the car. Officer McCourtie entered the car to retrieve the bottle of wine. Once inside the car, he detected the odor of burning marijuana emanating from a “small burnt marijuana roach” resting on the

[224]

center console ashtray and more odor of sensimilla marijuana permeating throughout the vehicle. He traced this odor to a seven-by-nine-inch cardboard box sitting on the right rear seat. Officer McCourtie testified that the box was open with the tops folded down. A substantial quantity of marijuana was found in a large zip-lock plastic bag inside the box. The discovery of the marijuana led to defendant’s arrest.

The primary contention in defendant’s motion under Penal Code section 1538.5 was that the trial court was required to suppress all evidence relating to the “size, shape, condition, and smell” of the cardboard box that contained the incriminating zip-lock bag of marijuana. The cardboard box had been lost or destroyed by law enforcement authorities. Relying on

People

Hitch

(1974) 12 Cal.3d 641 [117 Cal.Rptr. 9, 527 P.2d 361], the defendant argued that since the authorities had failed to preserve the cardboard box for trial,

People v. Aguilar

AI Brief

LOW, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief