People v. Padilla

California Court of Appeal Mar 12, 1971 No. Crim. 18646Published

Before: Dunn

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the police inventory of the defendant's vehicle following a lawful arrest for driving under the influence was reasonable and constitutional, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for possession of amphetamines.

Issues

Whether the police inventory of the defendant's vehicle constituted an unreasonable search in violation of constitutional rights.
Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of knowing possession of contraband.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“When a claim is made that evidence is insufficient, an appellate court must view the evidence in a light favoring the judgment and is required to disregard contrary evidence or inferences.”

“Possession and knowledge can be established by circumstantial evidence.”

[1012]

Opinion

DUNN, J.

By information, appellant was accused of violating Health and Safety Code section 11911, possessing amphetamine, a restricted, dangerous drug (Health & Saf. Code, § 11901), for sale. He was found guilty, sentenced to state prison for the term prescribed by law and now appeals.

A jury trial was waived. Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5 was submitted to the court upon the evidence received at the preliminary hearing, plus additional testimony. The motion was denied. The trial of the case thereupon was submitted on the same basis, further evidence being taken, and the trial court found defendant guilty, as indicated.

On this appeal defendant contends: (1) the court’s ruling on his motion to suppress was erroneous, and (2) the evidence was insufficient to justify a finding of guilt. We disagree.

About 7:25 p.m. the evening of April 27, 1969 state police officers observed appellant driving a vehicle westbound on Whittier Boulevard, and making a left turn in violation of the rights of an eastbound vehicle. The officers pursued appellant and directed him to the curbing. Appellant got out of the car. He was given a sobriety test and the officers concluded he was under the influence of alcohol. Another man was a passenger in the vehicle but disappeared, leaving the scene. Efforts made by the officers to locate him were unavailing. The vehicle was a Ford pickup truck with a camper body on the truck bed. It was owned by appellant.

Appellant was arrested and placed in the patrol car. One officer called for a tow truck in order to impound appellant’s vehicle. While waiting for it to arrive, the officer made an inventory of the contents of the vehicle, using California Highway Patrol form No. 180. Behind the right front section of the seat, two brown paper bags were found. One contained three rolls of film and the other contained 858 white, double-scored tablets of amphetamine.

After the motion to suppress was denied, there was trial evidence that other amphetamine tablets were discovered in the camper.

In contending that cataloguing the contents of the vehicle was accomplished in violation of his constitutional rights, appellant relies chiefly upon

People v. Padilla

AI Brief

DUNN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief