People v. Scott CA2/8

Filed 7/29/15 P. v. Scott CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B261445

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA418980) v.

RAYNARD SCOTT,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Lisa B. Lench, Judge. Affirmed.

Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

Defendant and appellant Raynard Scott appeals from his conviction, following entry of a plea of no contest to one count of possession for sale of cocaine base and imposition of a four-year prison term. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5.) We affirm. Defendant was under surveillance by the Los Angeles Police Department. Officers had obtained information, apparently from an anonymous tip, that defendant was dealing drugs. While under surveillance, defendant was observed leaving his home, with a passenger. As defendant drove past the officers, the officers saw that neither defendant, nor his passenger, was wearing a seatbelt. Defendant drove to a tire shop and was seen exchanging packages with an individual who approached his car. Defendant’s passenger was observed counting money, and later on the shop’s surveillance video, was seen throwing a container into a bin full of water. The container was later recovered from the bin and it had bindles of narcotics inside. Based on the seatbelt violations, officers approached defendant’s car. They immediately smelled a strong odor of marijuana. Defendant admitted he had marijuana in the car and consented to a search. When officers started a brief patdown search, defendant’s baggy front shirt pocket was “hanging open” and two clear plastic baggies were plainly visible inside the pocket. Defendant was detained. An individual standing in front of the tire shop asked one of the officers if he could have defendant’s keys. The officers denied the request. Based on their experience, the officers believed the individual may have been trying to warn someone at defendant’s home about his arrest. The officers were concerned about the possible destruction of evidence at defendant’s home. After arriving at defendant’s home with defendant in the patrol car, a neighbor confirmed for the officers that defendant did not live alone. They entered the home to make a protective sweep. After ensuring the safety of the premises and that no one was inside who could destroy evidence, the officers asked defendant for his consent to search the house. Defendant signed a written consent form and directed the officers to where some rock cocaine was stored. Officers also recovered a scale and some ammunition.