People v. Osoy CA2/7
Filed 9/21/20 P. v. Osoy CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN
THE PEOPLE, B297335
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA472448) v.
JAMES STEVE OSOY,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Kristi Lousteau, Judge. Affirmed. James R. Bostwick, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________
James Steve Osoy appeals from the judgment following his negotiated no contest plea to possession for sale of a controlled substance. He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5). We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. The Incident On the afternoon of October 24, 2018 Los Angeles Police Officer Enrique Trujillo saw a car partially parked in a marked disabled parking space without a disabled parking license plate or placard. Osoy was seated in the driver’s seat, with a male in the front passenger seat. As Trujillo approached the driver’s side of the car, he could smell “an odor of cannabis being emitted from the vehicle.” He requested Osoy and the passenger to step out of the car. Trujillo noticed an open toiletry bag on the floorboard, partially concealed under the driver’s seat. Trujillo could see what appeared to be small plastic bags containing a white crystalline substance inside the toiletry bag. Trujillo asked Osoy and passenger if there was “dope” in the car. Osoy said no, but the passenger said there was “wax,” which Trujillo understood as street vernacular for “concentrated cannabis.” Trujillo searched the car, seized the toiletry bag, and found the cannabis in a passenger door compartment. The toiletry bag contained 15 to 20 small plastic bags with a white crystalline substance that appeared to be methamphetamine. According to Officer Trujillo, methamphetamine was commonly sold and ingested in the area where the car was illegally parked. Officer Trujillo did not see any objects in the car that the occupants could have used to ingest methamphetamine.
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)