People v. Tovar CA5
Filed 12/8/21 P. v. Tovar 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F082009 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. BF174788A) v.
ANTHONY TOVAR, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Eric Bradshaw, Judge. Thomas R. O’Brien, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Poochigian, J. and Detjen, J.
INTRODUCTION Appellant and defendant Anthony Tovar pleaded no contest to being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to state prison. On appeal, his appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We affirm. FACTS The following facts are from the evidentiary hearing on defendant’s suppression motion, where the parties stipulated that the defendant was detained and searched without a warrant. At 1:14 a.m. on December 9, 2018, the 911 dispatcher received a call that a subject with a gun was threatening to shoot people at a house party on Oregon Street in Bakersfield. The dispatcher asked for the caller’s name, but the caller declined and remained anonymous. The dispatcher asked the caller for a description of the subject. The caller said the subject was a “Black male, early 20s in a black jacket, black knit cap, blue jeans, waving a black handgun in the air, threatening to shoot subjects, possibly gang affiliated … with a large house party to the front,” and the subject was still at the scene. The caller said the person with the firearm was wearing a black beanie. The dispatcher recorded that information as a “knit cap,” consistent with her training, and transmitted this information to officers. Officer Peña received the call and description at 1:30 p.m. and responded to the area. When Peña turned onto Oregon Street, he saw a man walking westbound on the sidewalk. The man was three houses away from the address given by the caller. Peña testified there was an active party still taking place on Oregon Street, and he could hear the people and noise coming from that house. The man was walking away from the house where the party was.
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)