People v. Guillen CA5
Filed 10/30/14 P. v. Guillen CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, F067066 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. VCF263380) v.
ADAM GUILLEN, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. James W. Hollman, Judge.
Nuttall & Coleman, Roger T. Nuttall and Glenn M. Kottcamp for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen G. Herndon and Max Feinstat, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
*Before Levy, Acting P.J., Kane, J. and Peña, J.
Defendant Adam Guillen entered a no contest plea to one count of possession of child pornography (Pen. Code, § 311.11, subd. (a)) after his motion to suppress the evidence against him was denied. As a result of his plea, the trial court sentenced him to a term of five years of felony probation and ordered him to serve 180 days in custody. On appeal he argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence. We affirm. FACTS1 At the preliminary hearing, Porterville police officer Joe Echevarria testified he was dispatched to Darrell Smith’s residence to allow his daughter, Jodie Guillen, to pick up property belonging to her husband, defendant. Jodie and defendant had lived with Smith at the residence for approximately one and a half years and were in the process of moving out. Subsequently, Echevarria was told to contact Smith’s nephew, Robert Spain. Spain related he, along with his wife and daughter, had been helping Smith clean out the room occupied by defendant. While cleaning the room, Spain’s daughter located a briefcase or small suitcase under the bed. Spain told Echevarria Smith did not want defendant’s things at his home, so Spain had offered to keep the briefcase. Spain went through the briefcase and discovered videos containing child pornography. Spain had viewed the contents of the DVD’s in a “family setting” with “everybody” watching it. Spain’s daughter was dating an officer from the Porterville Police Department and had informed him of the contents of the suitcase. He, in turn, informed Echevarria’s supervisor, who instructed Echevarria to determine what was found in the suitcase. Echevarria took possession of the disks and briefcase. Detective Matthew Green investigated the contents of the suitcase. It contained magazines, DVD’s, CD’s, and portable media storage devices. Green obtained a search
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)