People v. Dominguez CA6

Filed 10/30/14 P. v. Dominguez CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H040302 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SS121738A)

v.

RUBEN AYALA DOMINGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

After a vehicle stop for speeding, defendant Ruben Ayala Dominguez was found in possession of marijuana and a loaded nine-millimeter handgun. The drugs and firearm were found during a search of the vehicle, which was prompted by the odor of marijuana. Following an unsuccessful motion to suppress the evidence seized during the warrantless search, Dominguez pleaded no contest to carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle. (Pen. Code, § 25400, subd. (a)(3).)1 As part of the negotiated plea agreement, Dominguez admitted the special allegation that he was not the registered owner of the firearm (id., subd. (c)(6)) and that the firearm was loaded. The court sentenced Dominguez to felony probation, as called for by the plea agreement. Dominguez’s counsel has filed an opening brief in which no issues are raised and asks this court for an independent review of the record as required by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We notified Dominguez of his right to submit a written argument on his own behalf, but he has not done so. 1 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Pursuant to Wende, we reviewed the entire record and have concluded that, with the exception of one error that we will address below, there are no arguable issues on appeal. As required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, we will provide “a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed.” We will further include information about aspects of the trial court proceedings that might become relevant in future proceedings. (Id. at p. 112.) I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Our summary of the facts is taken from the testimony at the March 15, 2013 suppression hearing. On August 17, 2012, California Highway Patrol Officers Michael Palma and Charles Rodriguez pulled Dominguez’s vehicle over for speeding. Officer Palma testified that Officer Rodriguez, who was driving their marked patrol unit, determined that Dominguez’s vehicle was travelling at 78 miles per hour in a 65 mile-per-hour zone by maintaining the same speed as the vehicle for five to eight miles. When Officer Palma approached the passenger side of the vehicle he smelled the odor of marijuana. The driver, who Officer Palma identified as Dominguez, admitted to having a small amount of marijuana in the vehicle. Officer Palma asked Dominguez to exit the vehicle, which he did. At Officer Palma’s request, Rafael Garcia, a deputy sheriff with the Monterey County Sheriff’s Department who had arrived on the scene shortly after the traffic stop, searched the vehicle. Deputy Garcia testified that he smelled marijuana upon approaching the vehicle and saw a marijuana pipe containing marijuana residue in the ashtray. Deputy Garcia opened a closed backpack sitting on the front passenger seat and found a prescription bottle containing marijuana and a second marijuana pipe. Under the driver’s seat Deputy Garcia found a box of ammunition. Deputy Garcia lifted up the floorboard on the passenger’s side because it appeared to have been tampered with and found a loaded nine-millimeter handgun under the