People v. Bryan

FOURT, J.

This, is an appeal from a judgment of conviction of possessing marijuana for sale.

In an information filed in Los Angeles on July 29, 1966, defendant was charged with possessing marijuana for sale on July 10, 1966. It was further charged that defendant previously had been convicted in the federal court system of a violation of the narcotics laws in 1959 and had served a term therefor in a federal prison. Defendant pleaded not guilty and denied the- charged prior conviction. In a nonjury trial defendant was found guilty as charged and the charged prior conviction was found to be true. Defendant was sentenced to the state prison. A timely notice of appeal was filed.

On or about July 10, 1966, Deputy Sheriffs Penland, Velasquez, Kennerly and Alvarez went to an address on East Whittier Boulevard. Upon arriving at the house, in the rear of a pool hall, the officers knocked on a door. Defendant answered the door knock and the deputies identified themselves. . Defendant said, ‘ ‘ Gome in. Don’t stand out on the porch.”' The deputies entered a combination dining-roomltitchen. Mrs. Bryan and a child were in the room as was defendant. Velasquez stated to Mrs. Bryan that he would like to talk to her and she nodded in the affirmative and said “Okay.” Mrs. Bryan then walked into an adjoining bedroom. Velasquez and Penland followed her into the room. Penland stated that they had been informed that there was marijuana in the house and asked whether she minded if they looked around. She replied, “No.” As the officers were talking to Mrs.'Bryan, Penland saw in plain sight on a piece of paper on top of the dresser some loose pieces of what appeared to be marijuana. Defendant was arrested. The officers then looked in" the dresser and found a paper container with some cigarette papers, two hand-rolled marijuana cigarettes, a small screwdriver such as is sometimes used to tuck in the ends of rolled marijuana cigarettes, and a separate container of about a half-pound of marijuana. Upon being placed under arrest defendant was fully advised of his constitutional pights.

The officers stated to defendant that sometimes it was the practice to take everyone in the house into custody to which defendant made no reply. As the officers were walking out of

[233]

the house with defendant he freely and voluntarily stated, not in response to any question, “ [a] 11 of the stuff in the house is mine. I don’t want my wife and children to become involved. ’ ’ At the time the: statement was made the wife and children were in the house and none of them had been placed under arrest.