People v. Tolliver CA3

Filed 4/22/15 P. v. Tolliver CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento)

THE PEOPLE, C075855

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12F06252)

v.

RESHON ANDRE TOLLIVER,

Defendant and Appellant.

After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, defendant Reshon Andre Tolliver pleaded no contest to possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and admitted having served a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).1 On December 6, 2013, defendant was sentenced to local prison for the middle term of two years plus one year for the prior prison term.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

Sixty-one days later, on February 5, 2014, notices of appeal were filed in propria persona and by trial counsel. The notice filed by counsel indicates that the appeal is based on the denial of the suppression motion. Contrary to the People’s argument, the appeal does not require a certificate of probable cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(4)(A).) After briefing was completed, we granted defendant’s motion for constructive filing of the late notice of appeal. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court deprived him of his right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures when it denied his motion to suppress evidence seized during an unlawful detention. We affirm. FACTS FROM SUPPRESSION HEARING Prosecution Case-in-chief On September 17, 2012, around 5:00 p.m., Elk Grove Police Officers Jason Kearsing and Chris Morrow were dispatched to Coins, Currency, and Collectibles regarding a report of two males attempting to pawn a large quantity of women’s jewelry. The men were described as black males, 20 to 30 years of age, tall and tattooed, wearing white shirts, and driving a newer model black car. The reporting party said, “[i]t just seems really odd these two guys have all these women’s jewelries.” Upon arriving, the officers saw two black males, both with tattoos and white shirts, leaning into a black PT Cruiser, one on the driver’s side and the other on the passenger’s side. Officer Kearsing proceeded into the shop to contact the reporting party. Officer Morrow contacted the two men who were later identified as Christopher Chapman and defendant. Officer Morrow asked the men to sit in the PT Cruiser “just to keep[] them there at the scene for [his own] safety . . . .” Then Morrow approached the driver’s side of the car. Morrow decided to detain the men in order to permit further investigation of their attempt to sell property that might be stolen. Both men were cooperative but Morrow found them “argumentative” in that they questioned the reason for their detention.