People v. Garcia CA5

Filed 9/29/14 P. v. Garcia CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F066733

v. (Super. Ct. No. BF1450001A)

ERICA MONIQUE GARCIA, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Michael G. Bush, Judge. Elizabeth Campbell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Daniel B. Bernstein and Doris A. Calandra, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Detjen, Acting P.J., Franson, J., and Chittick, J.†

† Judge of the Fresno Superior Court assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

After the trial court denied her motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5),1 defendant Erica Monique Garcia pled no contest to two counts of receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)). The court sentenced her to three years eight months in jail pursuant to section 1170, subdivision (h). On appeal, she contends the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress evidence because the officer who stopped her lacked reasonable suspicion to believe she was involved in criminal activity. We affirm. FACTS At the suppression motion hearing, an officer testified that while he was on duty November 5, 2012, at about 5:13 a.m., he observed a man walking in a residential neighborhood in the dark. As the officer approached, he saw mail sticking out of the man’s pocket and he became suspicious. The man lifted his sweater and pulled it over the mail to conceal it. The officer asked him if he was on probation or parole, and he answered he was on parole. He said he was just going for a walk. He explained that he had a tan Ford Ranger and it was parked around the corner on a certain street. The officer examined the mail and saw that it was addressed to Diana P. at an address within 50 to 100 feet from where they were standing. As they spoke, a tan Ford pickup turned from the street the man had named and pulled up behind the patrol car. It stopped momentarily and then proceeded around the patrol car very slowly. The officer motioned with his flashlight for the pickup to stop because it matched the description of the pickup the man had given him. Defendant, who was driving, stopped the pickup in the road approximately parallel to the patrol car. The officer walked to the passenger’s side and motioned for defendant to roll down her window. She was not able to roll it down, so the officer spoke to her by opening the passenger door. He asked her where she was going and if the pickup was her vehicle.