People v. Superior Court

DRAPER, P. J.

The fruits of one burglary were discovered when police searched an automobile involved in another such crime. Defendant Hampton moved to suppress this evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5, subd. (a)(1)). His motion was granted, and the People sought mandate (Pen. Code, § 1538.5, subd. (o)). We issued alternative writ.

Mrs. Jones was a baby-sitter at the Hill home in a residential area of Richmond. At about 9 a.m. she noticed two men in a white Cadillac parked across the street. They sat for some time. The driver then left, walked around the corner, and ultimately returned. The car was driven away, returned, and again parked, bearing the same two men. It was gone when Mrs. Jones went out to lunch, taking the baby with her. When

[796]

she came back, the Cadillac was again parked, but was vacant. As Mrs. Jones opened the door of the Hill residence, a man rushed out and ran down the street, away from the Cadillac, and disappeared. Mrs. Jones recognized him as the driver of the Cadillac she had seen in the morning. The police were called, and when the officer arrived, she told him of her observations. The officer inspected the Cadillac and found it registered to defendant Hampton at an address remote from the Hill residence. In the glove compartment he found a wallet belonging to one Jerry Williams, whose name he knew in connection with burglary investigation. The officer took the keys from the ignition and opened the trunk. There he found a television set and a typewriter later discovered to have been stolen from a house just around the corner from the Hill home. It is this evidence which was suppressed. Hampton later returned to the car, and was then arrested. No warrant for search or arrest had been issued. Hampton raised the present issue at preliminary examination, but was held to answer. Motion to suppress was made in superior court based upon the evidence at preliminary, and was granted.

The ready mobility of an automobile may render its search reasonable when search of a house or other fixed structure would not be

(Cooper

v.

California,

386 U.S. 58, 59 [17 L.Ed.2d 730, 732, 87 S.Ct. 788];