People v. Cowan CA3
Filed 10/9/14 P. v. Cowan CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----
THE PEOPLE, C074693
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 11F07235, 12F07226) v.
TARAHN JAVIN COWAN,
Defendant and Appellant.
This case involves two separate jury trials. In the first case (case No. 11F07235), a jury found defendant Tarahn Javin Cowan guilty of unlawfully driving or taking a car (a black Infiniti) and receiving stolen property (a Dodge Challenger). In the second case (case No. 12F07226), a jury found defendant guilty of evading a peace officer while the officer’s marked vehicle exhibited at least one red lamp and was sounding its siren and evading a peace officer by driving on a highway in a direction opposite to traffic. The trial court sentenced defendant to prison for a total of 10 years and eight months for both cases.
1
On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred: (1) in failing to suppress the evidence against him in the first case because there was no reasonable suspicion to detain him; and (2) admitting in both cases the statements he made to police following his detention and arrest for driving or taking the Infiniti. We disagree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I The First Case (Case No. 11F07235) A Unlawful Driving Or Taking Of The Black Infiniti On October 7, 2011, a manager at the Infiniti of Elk Grove car dealership noticed one of its black luxury sports utility vehicles was missing, a 2011 Infiniti QX56 worth approximately $70,000. Surveillance video showed that five days prior, a man had stolen the black Infiniti, which had on it a paper license plate and a license plate frame, both from Beshoff Infiniti, one of Infiniti of Elk Grove’s competitors. Around 1:00 p.m. on October 18, 2011, a detective with the Elk Grove Police Department posted a bulletin with a picture of a 2011 black Infiniti QX56 similar to the one that had been stolen, a “description of the vehicle,” “a short synopsis of the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the vehicle,” and a statement that a “male with a light-colored sweatshirt” had stolen the vehicle. At 5:10 p.m. on the same day, Elk Grove Police Department Detective Matthew Sanchez was in an unmarked car with two officer trainees, Elk Grove Police Officers Lindsey Goesch and Nicole Monroe, on Mack Road heading back to the police station. None of them were in uniform. Detective Sanchez saw a black Infiniti QX56 with paper plates on it that said “ ‘Beshoff Infiniti.’ ” The Infiniti attracted Detective Sanchez’s attention because of the bulletin. The Infiniti was “swerving in and out of traffic changing lanes” with “no turn signals” and driving “much faster than the flow of traffic, trying to get somewhere in a hurry.” Detective Sanchez was not able to keep up with the
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)