People v. Graves-Wright CA1/1

Filed 11/19/14 P. v. Graves-Wright CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A140007 v. TAREY SHANNON GRAVES-WRIGHT, (Solano County Super. Ct. No. FCR298692) Defendant and Appellant.

Following a jury trial, defendant Tarey Shannon Graves-Wright was convicted of felony methamphetamine possession and misdemeanor possession of a smoking device. The sole issue she raises on appeal is that the superior court judge sitting as a magistrate at her combined preliminary hearing and motion to suppress erred by not granting her suppression motion. We hold defendant forfeited the issue by failing to renew her motion in superior court, and affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND A. Pretrial Proceedings Defendant was charged by felony complaint with possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a); count 1) and misdemeanor possession of a smoking device (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364.1, subd. (a); count 2). The complaint further alleged in connection with count 1 that defendant had suffered a prior conviction

for which she served a prison term ending within five years of the charged offense. (Pen. Code,1 § 667.5, subd. (b).) On May 3, 2013, following the conclusion of a preliminary hearing and denial of a motion to suppress pursuant to section 1538.5, defendant was held to answer on the charges. The hearing was held before Judge Mike Nail, a superior court judge sitting as a magistrate. Judge Nail proposed, and the parties agreed, to deem the complaint an information, and to proceed forthwith with the arraignment. Defendant pleaded not guilty to both charges and denied the alleged prior conviction and prison term. Defendant’s jury trial began on August 19, 2013, with superior court Judge Robert Bowers presiding. Prior to trial, the defense moved in limine to exclude (1) evidence of defendant’s prior criminal record and (2) any evidence not previously disclosed to the defense. The defense did not renew the motion to suppress at any time after the complaint was deemed to be the information. B. Trial Evidence On February 26, 2013, at approximately 11:38 p.m., Fairfield Police Officer Richard Mroz stopped a vehicle for speeding after pacing it driving at about 43 miles per hour in a 30-mile-per-hour speed zone. As he walked to driver’s side of the vehicle he noticed there were five people in it, including defendant who was seated in the left rear passenger seat directly behind the driver. He asked each person in the car to provide their identification. Officer Mroz ran warrant checks on the passengers as well as the driver. Within “a couple minutes,” the officer learned the driver was on parole. When Officer Mroz learned the driver was on parole for burglary, he decided to conduct a parole search, and called for a cover unit. The cover officers arrived “relatively quickly. . . . Within a couple minutes.” Once the cover officers arrived, Officer Mroz ordered the driver and then the passengers to exit the vehicle one at a time. The officer patted down the driver and searched his person, before having him sit on the curb. As the other individuals alighted from the vehicle, Officer Mroz asked them