People v. Porras

California Court of Appeal Dec 17, 1979 No. 19390Published

Before: White

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a police ruse, which induces a suspect to flee their home and abandon incriminating evidence, does not render the evidence inadmissible, as the ruse merely causes the defendant to perform an incriminating act of their own volition.

Issues

Whether a police ruse involving a deceptive telephone call to a suspect's residence constitutes an unlawful search or seizure.
Whether the abandonment of evidence by a suspect fleeing their home due to a police ruse is voluntary and admissible.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Given the fact that we are faced with an almost identical fact situation as the one found in Rand, we feel compelled to follow Rand.”

99 Cal.App.3d 874 (1979) 160 Cal. Rptr. 627 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

RICHARD DEAN PORRAS, Defendant and Appellant.

Docket No. 19390. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Three.

December 17, 1979. [875] COUNSEL

Ronald W. Rose for Defendant and Appellant.

George Deukmejian, Attorney General, Robert H. Philibosian, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Edward P. O'Brien, Assistant Attorney General, Clifford K. Thompson, Jr., and R. Gordon Baker, Jr., Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

[876] OPINION

WHITE, P.J.

Defendant and appellant Richard Dean Porras appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County entered after he pled guilty to two violations of Health and Safety Code section 11378 (possession of LSD and methylenedioxy amphetamines for sale.)[1] Appellant contends on appeal that the evidence was unlawfully obtained.

In March of 1976, Officer Skalland and other members of the San Jose Police Department began surveillance of apartment 56, 3200 Payne Street, San Jose. Skalland had received information that several individuals who were believed to have been involved in an armed robbery lived in this apartment. Several times between March and June of 1976 a confidential informant, who on numerous occasions in the past provided reliable information, told Officer Skalland that narcotics were being used and sold from apartment 56 at 3200 Payne. Officer Skalland did nothing but continue the surveillance.

On June 20 and 21, 1976, the same confidential informant gave Officer Skalland firsthand information regarding narcotic activity in apartment 56. Shortly before 10 p.m. on June 22, 1976, the confidential informant told Skalland that the occupants of apartment 56 were in possession of approximately 1,000 doses of LSD, 2,000 doses of methylenedioxy amphetamines and a quantity of marijuana. The confidential informant stated that the occupants of the apartment were then manicuring marijuana on the kitchen table and that they kept the LSD, the amphetamines and the proceeds from drug sales in a silver gray metal tool box in the apartment.

People v. Porras

AI Brief

WHITE, P.J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOTES

AI Brief