People v. Spears CA3
Filed 7/29/14 P. v. Spears CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Yolo) ----
THE PEOPLE, C074820
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF13745)
v.
ALVIN LOUIS SPEARS,
Defendant and Appellant.
After pleading no contest to possession for sale of methamphetamine and being a felon in possession of a firearm and admitting three prior drug convictions, defendant Alvin Louis Spears was sentenced to state prison. Defendant appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code,1 § 1538.5), contending that the patdown search performed was unlawful. We affirm.
1 Undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.
1
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND After the preliminary examination, defendant filed a section 1538.5 motion seeking to suppress all observations by the police during their warrantless search, all statements allegedly made by defendant during the search, and all physical evidence taken from defendant.2 At the hearing on the motion, the People presented the testimony of the arresting officers, Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputies Donald Harmon and Almir Dugonjic. Defendant did not present evidence. Deputy Harmon testified as follows: Around 8:30 a.m. on February 21, 2013, while he and Deputy Dugonjic were on patrol in Dunnigan, they saw a car turn onto County Road 88B, do a U-turn and come back in the same direction, then stop in the middle of the intersection of County Roads 88B, 88C, and 4, partially blocking the intersection. The officers stopped their patrol car about 15 feet behind the car, but did not turn on their emergency lights or siren. While the officers were still in their patrol car, defendant got out of the car from the passenger side. As they walked toward the car, defendant approached them and they began to speak to him. Then Deputy Harmon told Deputy Dugonjic to talk to the driver, who was still in the car. Defendant seemed “nervous, confused.” He was holding a cell phone and claimed to be lost. His eyes were red and bloodshot. Defendant was wearing baggy jeans, which in Deputy Harmon’s experience could conceal weapons. The jeans were cinched at the waist. Deputy Harmon could not recall what defendant was wearing above the waist.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)