People v. Holt CA1/5

Filed 11/17/23 P. v. Holt CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A166868 v. ERIC GORDON HOLT, (Lake County Super. Ct. No. Defendant and Appellant. CR961838-B)

Appellant Eric Gordon Holt appeals from a judgment following his no contest plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1)).1 Appellant’s counsel has raised no issue on appeal and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellate counsel advised appellant of his right to file a supplementary brief to bring to this court’s attention any issue he believes deserves review. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106.) Appellant has not filed such a brief. We have reviewed the record, find no arguable issues, and affirm.

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

BACKGROUND Information In May 2022, appellant was charged by information with possession of methamphetamine while armed with a loaded firearm (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.1, subd. (a)); two counts of carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle (§ 25400, subd. (a)(1)); being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition (§§ 29800, subd. (a)(1), 30305, subd. (a)(1)); and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364). A codefendant was also charged. Appellant pled not guilty to all counts. Motion to Suppress In July 2022, appellant and his codefendant filed a motion to suppress (§ 1538.5). Deputy Michael Nakahara was the sole witness at the suppression hearing. About 10:00 p.m. on September 6, 2021, Nakahara pulled over a car on Highway 20 because it had illegally tinted windows and appeared to have an expired registration. Appellant’s codefendant was the driver and appellant was the sole passenger. Nakahara confirmed the registration had expired and could not determine who the owner was. The driver claimed the car was hers but could not provide proof of ownership. The driver’s license was not valid and she appeared to be under the influence of a controlled substance. Appellant told Nakahara he had outstanding arrest warrants. Nakahara impounded the vehicle because the registration was expired and the car was parked on the shoulder of Highway 20 in front of a business, impeding pedestrian access. The People submitted a photograph showing the location of the parked car. Before the vehicle was impounded, Nakahara conducted an inventory search pursuant to department policy that, prior to impound, officers document valuables and other notable items in a vehicle on