People v. Locke, Cr. 3545

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtAULT; COUGHLIN, Acting P.J., and WHELAN
Citation79 Cal.Rptr. 367,274 Cal.App.2d 541
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Price Edwin LOCKE, Defendant and Appellant.
Decision Date01 July 1969
Docket NumberCr. 3545

Page 367

79 Cal.Rptr. 367
274 Cal.App.2d 541
The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Price Edwin LOCKE, Defendant and Appellant.
Cr. 3545.
Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1, California.
July 1, 1969.
Hearing Denied Sept. 17, 1969.

[274 Cal.App.2d 542] Sidney Lester and George H. Chula, Santa Ana, for defendant and appellant.

[274 Cal.App.2d 543] Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Michael L. Abrams, Deputy Atty. Gen., for plaintiff and respondent.

OPINION

AULT, Associate Justice pro tem. *

Price Edwin Locke appeals a judgment (probation order) convicting him of possessing marijuana (Health & Saf.Code, § 11530), after his case was submitted to the court on the transcript of his preliminary examination.

The police arrested Locke in the same narcotics raid which resulted in the conviction of James Henry Clay (People v. Clay, Cal.App., 78 Cal.Rptr. 56). As we noted in Clay, the police raid was precipitated

Page 368

when a federal undercover narcotics agent, Lusardi, negotiated a purchase of five pounds of hashish from a man named Amaranthus in a South Laguna Beach house. Several people, including Locke were present in the house. Locke did not participate in the sale transaction.

When Lusardi saw the hashish in house, he alerted other officers and agents who converged on the house. As Lusardi, with two other agents, approached the rear of the house, he heard shuffling, people running and shouting, and a shot being fired. The agents forced their way into the house. Here, as in Clay, we reject the contention the agents should have knocked, announced themselves and stated their purpose in compliance with Penal Code, section 844. Noncompliance with that section is excused where the oficers may reasonably believe compliance would increase their peril (a shot was fired), an arrest would be frustrated, or evidence destroyed (the running and shouting reasonably indicated an attempted escape or narcotics being destroyed) (People v. Rosales, 68 Cal.2d 299, 305, 66 Cal.Rptr. 1, 437 P.2d 489).

In the living room of the house the officers arrested Locke. They saw several clear plastic bags of marijuana in the room approximately 5 to 7 feet from where Locke stood. The officers searched Locke finding a plastic bag containing a quarter to one-half ounce of very finely manicured or granulated marijuana in his front pants pocket.

The search of Locke was valid as incident to a lawful...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • People v. Valerio, Cr. 4159
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 29 Diciembre 1970
    ...portion was approximately one and one-half inches long, it may be inferred that it constituted a usable quantity (People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 544, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367; People v. Villalobos, On this state of the evidence, the People rested, and defendant reserved a motion Page 86 for a......
  • Lejeune v. State, No. 49404
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 14 Julio 1976
    ...for its factual determination. Because of this deficiency in proof, the case must be remanded for a new trial.' In People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367 (Ct. of App., 4th Dist., Div. 1--1969), the court 'Locke contends no showing was made the quarter to one-half ounce of mar......
  • Carmouche v. State, No. 50354
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 14 Julio 1976
    ...We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to establish that appellant possessed a usable quantity of marihuana. See People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rep. 367 (4th Cir., Div. 1, Complaint is made that the trial court erred in failing to require the State to disclose the identity......
  • King v. State, No. 971-83
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 25 Abril 1984
    ...conclude that the evidence is sufficient to establish that appellant possessed a usable quantity of marihuana. See People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367 (4th Cir., Div. 1, In Tovar v. State, 612 S.W.2d 616, relied on by appellant, the indictment alleged neither that the mari......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • People v. Valerio, Cr. 4159
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 29 Diciembre 1970
    ...portion was approximately one and one-half inches long, it may be inferred that it constituted a usable quantity (People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 544, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367; People v. Villalobos, On this state of the evidence, the People rested, and defendant reserved a motion Page 86 for a......
  • Lejeune v. State, No. 49404
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 14 Julio 1976
    ...for its factual determination. Because of this deficiency in proof, the case must be remanded for a new trial.' In People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367 (Ct. of App., 4th Dist., Div. 1--1969), the court 'Locke contends no showing was made the quarter to one-half ounce of mar......
  • Carmouche v. State, No. 50354
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 14 Julio 1976
    ...We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to establish that appellant possessed a usable quantity of marihuana. See People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rep. 367 (4th Cir., Div. 1, Complaint is made that the trial court erred in failing to require the State to disclose the identity......
  • King v. State, No. 971-83
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • 25 Abril 1984
    ...conclude that the evidence is sufficient to establish that appellant possessed a usable quantity of marihuana. See People v. Locke, 274 Cal.App.2d 541, 79 Cal.Rptr. 367 (4th Cir., Div. 1, In Tovar v. State, 612 S.W.2d 616, relied on by appellant, the indictment alleged neither that the mari......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT