Skip to content
Name: People v. Heslington
Case #: G043371
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 05/20/2011

Compliance with People v. Hobbs (1994) 7 Cal.4th 948, 971-972, requires the trial court to determine whether the affidavit in support of a search warrant has been properly sealed and whether disclosures must be made of confidential material, but once that is accomplished and some disclosure has been made, it is up to the defense to amend or renew the suppression motion in light of the further disclosures. In this case, after a redacted affidavit had been disclosed by the prosecution, the court found a reasonable probability the defendant would prevail on the motion to suppress. Based on that finding,…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Jones
Case #: C059440
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 09/03/2010
Subsequent History: Review granted 12/15/10: S187135

When there is reason to believe that criminal activity is ongoing or that evidence of criminality remains on the premises, what otherwise would be stale information presented in a search warrant, may provide probable cause for issuance of the warrant. The victim's purse containing her identifying information was stolen in 2002. In 2004, she received correspondence from collection agencies indicating that her identification had been used to open accounts and there were overdue accounts with AT&T and Liberty Wireless. An overdue account with AT&T had appellant's name and address. Also in 2004, the victim received a letter from Sprint advising…

View Full Summary
Name: U.S. v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc.
Case #: 05-10067
Court: US District Court
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 09/13/2010

The search and seizure of computer files is subject to the procedural safeguards outlined in U.S. v. Tamura (9th Cir. 1982) 694 F.3d 591. The government obtained a warrant to search for and seize drug-testing records and specimens to investigate a lab suspected of providing steroids to baseball players. A different lab than the one under investigation performed the drug tests and kept the specimens, and third entity maintained a list of the players tested, collected the specimens, and kept the test results. The government's warrant sought information on ten baseball players who had tested positive…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Torres
Case #: G042010
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 09/21/2010

Where a defendant properly presents motions in the trial court to set aside the information (Pen. Code, § 995), and to suppress evidence (Pen. Code, § 1538.5), both motions may be reviewed simultaneously on appeal. Appellant was convicted of various drug offenses stemming from a search of his vehicle and the subsequent warrant search of his residence. Before the preliminary hearing, he filed a motion to quash and traverse the search warrant and suppress evidence, pursuant to Penal Code section 1538.5, subdivision (f), contending the traffic stop was pretextual, the impound and inventory search was a ruse, and the search…

View Full Summary
Name: United States v. Payton
Case #: 07-10567
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 07/21/2009

A computer was not an ordinary container and could therefore not be searched pursuant to a search warrant which did not explicitly authorize it. Police believed that the residents of Payton's home were selling drugs, and got a search warrant which permitted a search of pay/owe ledgers and financial records, but did not explicitly authorize search of computers. Although police found no evidence of drug sales, an officer did find a computer with a screen saver on. The officer moved the mouse to stop the screen saver, and then opened a file which led to a federal…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hirata
Case #: B212061
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 07/28/2009

Stale information in a search warrant does not establish present probable cause for a search. On September 4, 2007, police obtained a search warrant for the search of the residence of appellant and several other buildings. In the 53-page supporting affidavit, the officer related that he conducted a nine-month investigation of a drug trafficking organization and described numerous sales. The most recent reference to appellant was June 14, 2007, with no facts showing surveillance of appellant or his house after that date. The police conducted the search approved by the warrant on September 6, and discovered methamphetamine and other controlled…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Reyes
Case #: B201294
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 03/24/2009

A person whose conversations are intercepted pursuant to a wiretap order issued by a federal court may litigate a section 1538.5 suppression motion in state court. During the investigation of a Los Angeles homicide, the investigating officer was contacted by an agent with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. The agent, investigating drug trafficking, had obtained a federal court order to intercept and monitor a mobile telephone. While monitoring the incoming and outgoing conversations, the authorities intercepted conversations implicating appellant in the homicide. Appellant subsequently filed a suppression motion in the state court, arguing for suppression of the intercepted communication but…

View Full Summary
Name: Fisher v. City of San Jose
Case #: 04-16095
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 03/11/2009

During a police standoff, once exigent circumstances justify the seizure of the suspect in his home, as long as the police are actively engaged in completing the arrest, they need not obtain a warrant before taking the suspect into custody, regardless whether the exigency has dissipated before the actual physical arrest occurs. In 1999, Fisher started the evening in his apartment, watching the World Series on television, cleaning his collection of rifles, drinking beer, and reading a book entitled The Second Amendment Primer. Over the next several hours, his evening deteriorated after he became involved with a security guard investigating…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nicholls
Case #: C054252
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/30/2008

Affidavit supporting search warrant for laptop computer was sufficient where officer alleged that child molesters often collect child pornography. Appellant was charged with child molestation and possession of child pornography based on materials seized from his laptop computer pursuant to a warrant. The affidavit in support of the warrant alleged that in the officer's experience, people who molest children tend to collect child pornography. On appeal, appellant argued that the probable cause affidavit failed to establish a fair probability that child pornography would be found in his laptop computer, laptop bag, or car. The appellate court rejected the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Robinson
Case #: C044703
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/26/2007
Subsequent History: 2/13/08 rev. granted (S158528)

The statute of limitations for a sex offense is satisfied when the prosecution is commenced within the period of limitations by the filing of an arrest warrant predicated upon the identification of the perpetrator by a DNA profile. The offenses in this case occurred on August 25, 1994. On August 21, 2000, four days before the expiration of the statute of limitations, the prosecutor filed a felony complaint against John Doe, describing him by DNA profile developed by semen taken from the victim. The next day, an arrest warrant issued which incorporated the DNA profile. Three…

View Full Summary