People v. Sihabouth CA3
Filed 3/23/16 P. v. Sihabouth CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C076143
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 13F01336)
v.
MACKSION SIHABOUTH,
Defendant and Appellant.
After the trial court denied his suppression motion, defendant Macksion Sihabouth pleaded no contest to cultivating, harvesting, and processing marijuana. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11358.) His sole contention on appeal is that his motion to suppress was improperly denied. (Pen. Code, § 1538.5.) We affirm the judgment.
1
BACKGROUND On February 27, 2013, Sacramento police officers executed a search warrant at 6412 Sunnyfield Way (Sunnyfield Way residence or the residence). In the course of the search, a police officer stopped a car driven by defendant; his codefendant David Nhan was a passenger in the car. Inside the trunk of defendant’s car, the police officer found a “ballast” often used as “marijuana grow equipment.” At the Sunnyfield Way residence, officers found a marijuana growing operation that consisted of over 150 plants as well as instructions for the operation. Officers also found packing materials and over $2,700 in cash. Officers then read defendant his Miranda1 rights, after which defendant told the officers the marijuana found at the Sunnyfield Way residence was his for personal use. Defendant was arrested and charged with cultivating, harvesting, drying, and processing marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11358) and possession of marijuana for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359). Defendant pleaded not guilty to both charges. He subsequently filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained on February 27, 2013, including the ballast found in his trunk and statements he made to the officers, pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5. At the suppression hearing, the trial court considered the following evidence: Sacramento Police Officers Andy Hall and David Putnam were part of a team executing a search warrant on the Sunnyfield Way residence on February 27, 2013. The subject of the warrant was defendant’s codefendant David Nhan. The warrant included the Sunnyfield Way residence, Nhan himself, and any vehicle under Nhan’s control. The warrant directed officers to search for “marijuana and its related paraphernalia involved in its use, sales and transportation.”
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)