P. v. Perez-Isidoro CA5

Filed 4/9/13 P. v. Perez-Isidoro 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F063780 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. MF0009762A) v.

CARLOS PEREZ-ISIDORO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Lee P. Felice, Judge. William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Gomes, Acting P.J., Poochigian, J. and Peña, J.

Following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5), appellant, Carlos Perez-Isidoro, pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). The court imposed the 16-month lower term. On appeal, appellant‟s sole contention is that the court erred in denying appellant‟s suppression motion. We affirm. FACTS California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer Jason Blais testified that on August 20, 2011, at approximately 2:35 p.m., he was on patrol when he stopped a vehicle for speeding on State Route 58 in Kern County.1 After determining that the driver did not have a valid driver‟s license, Officer Blais decided to impound the vehicle. Appellant and another person were passengers in the vehicle. CHP Officer Robert Main “was called to [the] scene” to transport the vehicle‟s occupants in his patrol vehicle “[o]ff the freeway to a safe location” while Officer Blais impounded the vehicle. At some point thereafter, appellant told Officer Blais that he (appellant) had left his backpack in the vehicle. Officer Blais escorted appellant back to the vehicle where appellant retrieved the backpack. Next, Officer Blais escorted appellant to Officer Main, who had arrived on the scene and who, for reasons of “[o]fficer safety,” “searched” appellant. Officer Main testified to the following: When he first made contact with appellant, appellant had his backpack “on him.” Officer Main “removed the backpack from [appellant‟s] person” and searched it for reasons of “[o]fficer safety, before placing it in [the officer‟s] patrol vehicle.” Inside the backpack, Officer Main found, among other things, “numerous baggies,” each containing a white crystalline substance he suspected was methamphetamine, and three glass smoking pipes of the kind used for “[s]moking controlled substances.” Officer Main also conducted a patdown of appellant.