People v. Kasinger

California Court of Appeal May 4, 1976 No. Crim. 14815Published

Before: Christian

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a probation search condition requiring 'reasonable cause' is satisfied by circumstances indicating that a search is advisable for effective probation supervision, and that the use of a ruse to gain entry does not violate notice requirements.

Issues

Whether the search of a probationer's apartment based on suspected narcotics activity satisfied the 'reasonable cause' requirement of a probation condition.
Whether the use of a ruse to gain entry into a probationer's apartment violates the notice requirements of Penal Code sections 844 or 1531.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We construe “reasonable cause,” in the context of the probation order, as meaning circumstances indicating that in the interests of effective probation supervision a search is advisable.”

“Officers who reasonably employ a ruse to obtain consent to enter a dwelling do not violate Penal Code sections 844 or 1531, even if they fail to announce their identity and purpose before entering.”

Opinion

CHRISTIAN, J.

James Thomas Kasinger pleaded guilty to possession of heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350). He has appealed from an ensuing order committing him for treatment as a narcotic addict. The sole issue on appeal is whether the court acted correctly in denying a motion to suppress the evidence upon which the charges were founded.

Appellant was on probation for grand theft, subject to a condition, among others, that he “shall submit to search . . . upon reasonable cause.” He contends that it was not reasonable for the officers to make use of the search condition of the probation order when they suspected appellant of trafficking in narcotics. Citing

People

Mason

(1971) 5 Cal.3d 759 [97 Cal.Rptr. 302, 488 P.2d 630], appellant also contends that the officers had no reasonable basis for suspecting unlawful activity and that the search amounted to harassment. A condition of probation will not be held invalid unless it “(1) has no relationship to the crime of which the offender was convicted, (2) relates to conduct which is not in itself criminal, and (3) requires or forbids conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality ...”

(People

Dominguez

(1967) 256 Cal.App.2d 623, 627 [64 Cal.Rptr. 290].) A condition requiring

[978]

submission to search is related to the crime of grand theft; hence, the condition was valid. There is no requirement that a search pursuant to a probation condition be founded on indications that the probationer “has resumed the veiy type of misconduct for which he was placed on probation.”

(People

Constancio

(1974) 42 Cal.App.3d 533, 539[116 Cal.Rptr. 910].)

People v. Kasinger

AI Brief

CHRISTIAN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief