People v. Baca CA3
Filed 7/19/16 P. v. Baca CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, C077956
v. (Super. Ct. No. SF128067A)
STEVEN MICHAEL DEAN BACA,
Defendant and Appellant.
Prior to trial, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5.1 The trial court denied the motion, finding defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the backpack at the time it was searched because he had abandoned the backpack when he fled from the officer. On appeal defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
evidence. We conclude the warrantless search of defendant’s backpack did not violate the Fourth Amendment because substantial evidence supports the trial court’s finding defendant abandoned the backpack when he fled from the officers. We affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The facts are taken from the evidence presented at the hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress. On May 9, 2014, Manteca Police Sergeant Gregg Beall and Stockton Police Lieutenant Michael Reynosa were on patrol in the city of Stockton as part of the San Joaquin County Gang Task Force. Lieutenant Reynosa was driving and Sergeant Beall was in the passenger seat. The officers were patrolling one of the most violent areas in Stockton; it was known for a high occurrence of gang activity (including Norteño gang activity), narcotics trade, and shootings. At about 5:30 p.m., the officers observed defendant and a female riding their bicycles against traffic. Defendant was wearing a solid red T-shirt Sergeant Beall knew was a very common style of dress for Norteño gang members. Defendant was also carrying a backpack. Lieutenant Reynosa activated the patrol car’s overhead lights to conduct a traffic stop. Defendant looked back at the officers at least twice but did not stop. He finally stopped after Sergeant Beall opened his door and ordered him to do so. Because it appeared defendant was “going to take off,” Sergeant Beall got out of the patrol car while it was still moving. Before he began questioning defendant, Sergeant Beall took defendant’s backpack and placed it several feet away from him. During their conversation, defendant told Sergeant Beall he had recently been arrested for attempted murder. Defendant stated he had “beat” the case or it had been dismissed. Following this exchange, Sergeant Beall
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)