People v. Escobar CA2/8
Filed 6/16/23 P. v. Escobar CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT
THE PEOPLE, B324277
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA120181) v.
MELODY ESCOBAR,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Tomson T. Ong, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded with directions. Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Kenneth C. Byrne and Blake Armstrong, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. **********
Defendant and appellant Melody Escobar pled no contest to one count of taking or driving a vehicle without permission. The trial court placed her on two years formal probation. One of the conditions of probation required defendant to submit to the search and seizure of all electronic devices. Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that the electronics search condition is overbroad and not reasonably related to the underlying crime or preventing future criminality. We strike the electronics search condition as phrased based on overbreadth and remand with directions for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court the opportunity to impose a more narrowly tailored electronics search condition. We otherwise affirm the judgment of conviction. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Defendant was charged, along with codefendant Luis Armando Morales, with carjacking (Pen. Code, § 215, subd. (a); count 1). Codefendant Morales was charged with three additional felonies, including assault with a semiautomatic firearm. The charges arose from an incident that occurred in July 2022. Defendant asked the victim for a ride to her home, which was only about a block away. When the victim stopped his car in front of defendant’s apartment building, Morales drove up and parked right behind him. Morales got out and confronted the victim, pointing a gun at him and telling him to get out of the car and hand over the keys or he would kill him. In fear for his life, the victim complied. Defendant and Morales then walked into the apartment building where defendant lived. The next day, the victim saw defendant driving his car and contacted the police. When the police detained defendant driving the victim’s car, she was found in possession of a glass pipe and two baggies containing a substance resembling 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)