People v. Putman CA5
Filed 1/7/22 P. v. Putman 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F081439 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Merced Super. Ct. v. No. 19CR-06066)
KENNETH ROBERT PUTMAN, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. Jeanne Schechter, Judge. Andrea Keith, 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 Kenneth Robert Putman was convicted of felony reckless driving and sentenced to the second strike term of 32 months in 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 On October 29, 2019, a team of law enforcement officers assigned to the United States Marshal’s Fugitive Task Force were in Merced County to locate and arrest defendant. He was wanted on an outstanding felony warrant in Montana. The officers were parked in unmarked vehicles near his parents’ residence, where they believed defendant was staying, and watching for his gold SUV. Around 5:00 p.m., defendant drove away from the residence in a gold SUV. Between five and seven unmarked law enforcement vehicles followed defendant. The officers’ vehicles were equipped with flashing lights and sirens, but they did not activate the signals while following defendant’s SUV. The officers were in plain clothes, wearing tactical raid vests that displayed their badges, and had large lettering that identified them as law enforcement officers. The officers followed defendant for one and one-half to two miles. Defendant drove at a normal speed and stopped at marked intersections. Officer Weber of the Stockton Police Department, a member of the team, was driving directly behind defendant, and testified that defendant repeatedly looked in his rearview mirror. Defendant drove for about 1.3 miles, turned into a gas station, and stopped. The officers followed him into the gas station, and they activated the flashing lights on their vehicles to conduct a traffic stop. Deputy United States Marshal Vic Hak was driving an unmarked vehicle with his partner, Officer Odell of the United States Forest Service’s Law Enforcement division.
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)