People v. Superior Court (Brown)
Citation | 49 Cal.App.3d 160,122 Cal.Rptr. 459 |
Court | California Court of Appeals |
Decision Date | 16 June 1975 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of California, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR the COUNTY OF COLUSA, Respondent; David Michael BROWN, Real Party in Interest. Civ. 15044. |
Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen. by Eddie T. Keller, Deputy Atty. Gen., Sacramento, for petitioner.
James Wurschmidt, Colusa, Cal., for real party in interest.
The People petition for appropriate writ relief (Pen.Code, § 1538.5(o)) following grant by the superior court of the motion of the real party in interest, David Michael Brown (hereinafter 'defendant'), to suppress evidence seized in the execution of a search warrant on premises occupied by defendant. The trial court concluded that the affidavit in support of the warrant was insufficient in that there was no statement of fact therein justifying a search at that particular location.
The motion to suppress followed the filing of an information charging defendant with burglary (Pen.Code, § 459) and grand theft (Pen.Code, §§ 484, 487). The charges were based upon the theft of personal property in the burglary of a residence in Colusa, California.
In that the instant proceeding turns upon the sufficiency of the affidavit for search warrant, the affidavit is set out in part as follows:
'STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF COLUSA
'Personally appeared before me this 8th day of October, 1974, Eloy Zaragoza, Sargeant (sic) of the Colusa Police Department, City of Colusa, County of Colusa, of the State of California, a peace officer, who on oath, makes complaint and deposes and says that he has, and there is reasonable and probable cause to believe, and that he does believe as follows:
'1. That there is now in the County of Colusa a single family dwelling and garage at 1127 Fremont Street, Colusa, California. That said house is now, and has been at all times mentioned herein, occupied by one David Michael Brown.
'2. That there is so located in said house and garage a quantity of stolen property, to wit:
(At this point the affidavit describes in detail numerous items of personal property.)
'That the property to be seized constitutes evidence which tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony.
'3. Affiant has been employed as a policeman for the City of Colusa for eight years and has acted on and received the information set forth in this affadavit (sic) in that capacity and alleges that the facts in support of the issuance of the search warrant are as follows:
'(a) That on or about September 7, 1974, between the hours of 1:30 A.M. and 7:15 A.M. the residence of Lucille DeJarnatt, 325 Tenth Street, Colusa, California, was burglarized and the aforementioned property was removed from the permises.
'(b) That upon investigation of the burglary affiant found clear latent fingerprints at the point of entry on the northeast second floor bedroom window and on a blue glass bottle inside the residence. The fingerprints were later identified as those made by David Michael Brown by the Investigative Services Branch of the California Department of Justice.
'(c) That affiant was informed by one William Wheeler, a police officer for the Colusa Police Department, that he observed David Michael Brown and Gary Thomas Thompson driving slowly by the DeJarnatt home in a brown jeep at or about 2:00 A.M. on September 7, 1974. Some 15 minutes later Officer Wheeler observed Gary Thomas Thompson driving the same vehicle alone in the vicinity of the DeJarnatt residence. About 45 minutes thereafter Officer Wheeler then observed Gary Thomas Thompson and David Michael Brown together in the brown jeep.
'(d) That William Wheeler is a reliable informant.
'Affiant has reasonable cause to believe that grounds for the issuance of a search warrant exist as set forth in Section 1524 of the Penal Code of the State of California based upon the aforementioned information, facts and circumstances.
'WHEREFORE, affiant prays that a search warrant be issued based upon this affadavit (sic) and petitions for seizure of the aforementioned stolen property, and that the same be brought before this magistrate or retained subject to the order of this court or of any other court in which the offense in respect to which the property or thing is triable, pursuant to Section 1536 of the Penal Code of the State of California.
's/ FRANK W. HUBBELL
Frank W. Hubbell, Judge
(SEAL)
'Attached hereto and marked Exhibit A: Declaration of William Wheeler.
'Attached hereto and marked Exhibit B: Physical Evidence Examination Report, submitted by Investigative Services Branch of the California Department of Justice.'
The return to the search warrant disclosed that with the conspicuous exception of cash, most of the stolen items were recovered from the defendant's residence.
We preface our review of the sufficiency of the affidavit with a summary of decisional law prescribing the scope and manner of such review. The test to be employed in evaluating the sufficiency of an affidavit in support of a search warrant is whether the facts disclosed therein are sufficient to lead a man of ordinary caution or prudence to believe and conscientiously entertain a strong suspicion that there is property subject to seizure in the place for which the warrant is sought. (See People v. Stout (1967) 66 Cal.2d 184, 192--193, 57 Cal.Rptr. 152, 424 P.2d 704; Skelton v. Superior Court (1969) 1 Cal.3d 144, 150, 81 Cal.Rptr. 613, 460 P.2d 485.) In examining the affidavit to ascertain the presence or absence of probable cause, courts are enjoined to interpret the affidavit in a non-technical, common sense manner. (People v. Superior Court (1972) 6 Cal.3d 704, 711, 100 Cal.Rptr. 319, 493 P.2d 1183; Griffin v. Superior Court (1972)26 Cal.App.3d 672, 689--690, 103 Cal.Rptr. 379.) As stated by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Ventresca (1965) 380 U.S. 102, at pages 108--109, 85 S.Ct. 741, 746, 13 L.Ed.2d 684: (See People v. Superior Court, supra,6 Cal.3d at p. 711, 100 Cal.Rptr. 319, 493 P.2d 1183.)
The California Supreme Court has stated: "An evaluation of the constitutionality of a search warrant should begin with the rule that 'the informed and deliberate determinations of magistrates empowered to issue warrants . . . are to be preferred over the hurried action of officers . . .who may happen to make arrests." Thus when a search is based on a warrant (and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Cook
......v. . Daniel Gary COOK, Defendant and Appellant. . Cr. 19804. . Supreme Court of California, In Bank. . Sept. 8, 1978. . Rehearing Denied Oct. 18, 1978. . [22 ...Dumas (1973) 9 Cal.3d 871, 880-881, 109 Cal.Rptr. 304, 512 P.2d 1208; Burrows v. Superior Court (1974) 13 Cal.3d 238, 249-250, 118 Cal.Rptr. 166, 529 P.2d 590.) . Instead, ... (People v. Mack (1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 839, 845, 136 Cal.Rptr. 283; People v. Superior Court (Brown) (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 160, 165, 122 Cal.Rptr. 459; see also People v. Gray (1976) 63 Cal.App.3d ......
-
State v. Rodriquez
......v. . Louis Anthony RODRIQUEZ, Appellant. . No. 1 CA-CR 5126. . Court of Appeals of Arizona, . Division 1, Department A. . Nov. 23, 1984. . ...Collins v. Superior Court, 132 Ariz. 180, 644 P.2d 1266 (1982), the decision in Mena does not ... See People v. Superior Court, 49 Cal.App.3d 160, 122 Cal.Rptr. 459 (1975), cf., ......
-
People v. Gonzalez
....... In re Jesse Edward GONZALEZ on Habeas Corpus. . The PEOPLE, Petitioner, . v. . The SUPERIOR COURT of Los Angeles County, Respondent; . Jesse Edward GONZALEZ, Real Party in Interest. . Nos. ...Miller (1978) 85 Cal.App.3d 194, 204, 149 Cal.Rptr. 204; see also People v. Superior Court (Brown) (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 160, 167-168, 122 Cal.Rptr. 459.) . The informant had ......
-
People v. Carrington, S043628.
......v. . Celeste Simone CARRINGTON, Defendant and Appellant. . No. S043628. . Supreme Court of California. . July 27, 2009. . [211 P.3d 629] . Lynne S. Coffin and Michael .... Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, ...Miller (1978) 85 Cal. App.3d 194, 204[, 149 Cal.Rptr. 204]; see also People v. Superior Court (Brown) (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 160, 167-168[, 122 Cal.Rptr. 459].)." When property has been ......