People v. Ashlock CA5
Filed 11/24/15 P. v. Ashlock 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F069435 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRM031881) v.
ROBERT DEAN ASHLOCK, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. Marc A. Garcia, Judge. Kelly C. Martin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Gomes, Acting P. J., Kane, J. and Detjen, J.
INTRODUCTION Appellant Robert Ashlock pled no contest to a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11370.1, subdivision (a) and admitted suffering one prison prior after his motion to suppress evidence was denied. Ashlock filed a notice of appeal stating he challenged the denial of the motion to suppress. Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We will affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On February 6, 2014, Merced Police Officer Reynaldo Alvarez was on duty. A tip had been received that a machine used to make fake credit cards was in one of the trailers located at an address on Chestnut Avenue. The tip did not indicate who was residing at the location or involved in the credit card scheme. When he arrived at the Chestnut Avenue address, Alvarez saw one larger mobile home trailer and three smaller trailers on the property. Alvarez was accompanied by Detective Johnson. They knocked on the door of the larger mobile home and asked if they could go in and search the residence; they were told no. At that point, Johnson and Alvarez walked over to another of the trailers on the property and knocked on the door. The two could hear people moving around inside the trailer. The door was answered by Ashlock. Ashlock was asked to step outside the trailer and he responded by stating he first wanted to get his shoes. As Ashlock was speaking, Gloria Gutierrez and another woman began to come out of the trailer. Alvarez asked Gutierrez if she was on probation or parole. Gutierrez responded that she was on felony probation. Alvarez asked Gutierrez if she was on “probation with search and seizure.” Gutierrez responded affirmatively. When asked who her parole officer was, she responded with the name of Probation Officer Mognis. Gutierrez indicated she currently was staying and sleeping at the trailer. At some point, Alvarez learned that Ashlock lived in the trailer, but could not recall if this information was provided before or after the 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)