People v. Jones CA2/2

Filed 4/11/14 P. v. Jones CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, B252035

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA411603) v.

TANGIE L. JONES,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT:* Defendant Tangie L. Jones appeals from the denial of her motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5.1 Upon denial of her motion, defendant agreed to enter into a plea bargain in which she pleaded “no contest” to possession of a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a) as a felony (count 1). For housing purposes only, she admitted a 2005 conviction for carjacking, a violation of section 215, subdivision (a), as a strike conviction. Defendant

* BOREN, P.J ., CHAVEZ, J., FERNS, J.†

† Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. 1 All further references to statutes are to the Penal Code unless stated otherwise.

admitted having suffered a prison sentence for a 2012 conviction of grand theft from a person in violation of section 487, subdivision (c) within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). Defendant agreed there was a factual basis for her plea. Defendant agreed to a suspended sentence of four years consisting of the high term of three years in state prison with a consecutive one-year term under section 667.5, subdivision (b). After suspending execution of the sentence, the trial court placed defendant on formal probation for three years under terms and conditions, which included serving 365 days in county jail and a one-year residential treatment program. The court granted credits for 109 actual days and 109 conduct credits for a total of 218 days of credit. The People moved to dismiss the remaining charges and allegations under section 1385.2 We appointed counsel to represent defendant on this appeal. On December 18, 2013, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which he stated that he had failed to find any arguable issues. On December 18, 2013, we informed defendant that she had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief containing any issues she wished this court to consider. On January 15, 2014, defendant filed a supplemental brief in which she argues the following grounds for appealing her motion to suppress: (1) the search conducted by Officer Rosas was unreasonable and illegal where the officer removed clothing to retrieve drugs while defendant was in handcuffs and seated in the back of a patrol car; (2) defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated because she had very limited search conditions under section 3453, subdivision (f), which governs Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS), i.e., she could not be searched without reasonable suspicion and probable cause, and “the seizure requirement does not apply”; (3) the officers gave false information in the police report and during the suppression hearing; and (4) neither officer read defendant her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384