People v. Van Sanden

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Citation73 Cal.Rptr. 359,267 Cal.App.2d 662
Decision Date26 November 1968
Docket NumberCr. 6824
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. James Paul VAN SANDEN, Defendant and Respondent.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., of California, Robert R. Granucci, John F. Henning, Jr., Deputy Attys. Gen., San Francisco, for appellant.

Jerome C. Durham, Public Defender County of Marin, Robert I. Conn, Deputy Public Defender County of Marin, San Rafael, for respondent.

SHOEMAKER, Presiding Justice.

The People appeal from an order granting defendant's motion under section 995 of the Penal Code to dismiss an information charging him with possession of marijuana.

On August 12, 1967, Officer MacNeil of Fairfax observed an old van with psychedelic painting on it making a turn onto Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. From his position, he could not see any front license plate, so he stopped the van because of the supposed lack thereof. However, without first checking on his supposition, he went directly to the driver, defendant Van Sanden, and asked for his driver's license. Defendant did not have a license but he produced identification in the form of a Selective Service card which gave his name as James P. Van Sanden.

The officer thought the name familiar, as he had a recollection that he had seen it on several outstanding traffic warrants, so he asked defendant if he had ever lived in the Fairfax area and defendant stated he had--at 33 Hill Avenue over a year before. MacNeil then placed defendant under arrest for the traffic warrants. However, it later turned out the officer was mistaken, as there were no traffic warrants for defendant.

Defendant then asked MacNeil what would be done with the van. MacNeil said he would have to impound it as there was no licensed person with defendant to drive it away.

MacNeil then searched defendant and the van. In the van, MacNeil observed a closed metal container labeled 'Constant Comment Tea' on a shelf behind the driver's seat; he opened it and found in it some marijuana. According to MacNeil, he had two reasons for opening the can. The first was that the van bore psychedelic painting and several 'hippie' individuals had previously informed him that it was common for people of that type to store marijuana or narcotics in containers similar to the tea can. Secondly, since he was impounding the van, he was taking an inventory of all contents for his protection.

Underneath a mattress in the van, MacNeil found a Sucrets can containing an additional quantity of marijuana.

Finally, upon completing his search, MacNeil walked to the front of the vehicle and discovered that there was a license plate, although the same was somewhat obscured.

The People make no attempt, on appeal, to contend that defendant's arrest and the search of his van was lawful because MacNeil reasonably, although erroneously, believed that he was executing a nonexistent traffic warrant in defendant's name. They argue instead that MacNeil was entitled to arrest defendant for two misdemeanor traffic violations: having an obscured front license plate, in violation of Vehicle Code section 5201, and failing to have a valid driver's license in his possession, in violation of Vehicle Code, section 12951. The People urge that since defendant was guilty of the above violations, defendant's arrest without a warrant was justified under Penal Code, section 836. The People deny that it is of any moment that defendant was in fact arrested on the basis of certain nonexistent traffic warrants and assert that where a public offense has actually been committed in an officer's presence, an arrest may be upheld on that basis even though made under the officer's mistaken belief that a different offense has been committed. (People v. Young (1934) 136 Cal.App. 699, 703, 29 P.2d 440; People v. Smith (1957) 153 Cal.App.2d 190, 192, 314 P.2d 31.)

It is settled that defendant's arrest for the above traffic violations could not serve as a basis for a search of the van. In People v. Moray (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 743, 35 Cal.Rptr. 432, defendant had made an illegal left turn and had failed to stop at a posted stop sign. The court stated: 'If the conduct set forth in the record in this case were to constitute probable cause for a traffic officer to believe that a felony has been committed and that a search of the motorist's vehicle is authorized, then practically every motorist in California who receives or is about to receive a traffic citation will be subject to having his person and his automobile searched by the traffic officer--such is fortunately not the law.' (P. 747, p. 434 of 35 Cal.Rptr.)

Although the People tacitly concede that the traffic violations in the instant case furnished no better basis for a search of the van than those committed in Moray, they do argue that such violations afforded valid grounds for defendant's arrest and that such arrest, in turn, afforded justification for the impounding of the van and the inventorying of the items contained therein. Thus it is urged that since MacNeil was required to bring defendant before a magistrate without unnecessary delay (Pen.Code, § 849), he was entitled to impound the van and inventory its contents under Vehicle Code, section 22651, subdivision (h). That provision states that a police officer may remove a vehicle from a highway '(w)hen an officer arrests any person driving or in control of a vehicle for an alleged offense and the officer is by this code or other law required or permitted to take and does take the person arrested before a magistrate without unnecessary delay.'

It is obvious that the officer's alleged right to arrest defendant for the two traffic violations and to bring him before a magistrate constitutes a crucial link in the chain of logic by which the People seek to justify the search of defendant's van. However, as defendant correctly points out, it was held in the recent case of People v. Wohlleben (1968) 261 A.C.A. 498, 67 Cal.Rptr. 826 (hearing denied by the California Supreme Court on June 19, 1968) that pursuant to Vehicle Code, sections 40300 through 40304 and section 40500, 'persons arrested by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • People v. Weitzer
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 30, 1969
    ...of the bulge itself. (See also Virgil v. Superior Court (1968) 268 A.C.A. 133, 136--138, 73 Cal.Rptr. 793; People v. Van Sanden (1968) 267 A.C.A. 739, 740--743, 73 Cal.Rptr. 359; and People v. Moray (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 743, 746--747, 35 Cal.Rptr. 432; and cf. People v. Bordwine (1968) 268......
  • People v. Newman, Cr. 8227
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 11, 1971
    ...more, did not justify a search of the vehicle. (People v. Weitzer, 269 Cal.App.2d 274, 290, 75 Cal.Rptr. 318; People v. Van Sanden, 267 Cal.App.2d 662, 664, 73 Cal.Rptr. 359; Bergeron v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.App.3d 433, 435, 82 Cal.Rptr. 711; see People v. Graves, 263 Cal.App.2d 719, 732, ......
  • People v. Superior Court
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 6, 1971
    ...426, 430--431, 88 Cal.Rptr. 750; People v. Weitzer (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 274, 294, 75 Cal.Rptr. 318; People v. Van Sanden (1968) 267 Cal.App.2d 662, 665, 73 Cal.Rptr. 359; People v. Wohlleben (1968) 261 Cal.App.2d 461, 463--465, 67 Cal.Rptr. 826; and People v. Shapiro (1963) 213 Cal.App.2d ......
  • People v. Vermouth, Cr. 4605
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • October 21, 1971
    ......3 Followed by People v. Denman, 19 Cal.App.3d 632, 97 Cal.Rptr. 23, where the contents of a vehicle were inventoried following the issuance of a citation for a traffic violation. (See also People v. Van Sanden, 267 Cal.App.2d 662, 73 Cal.Rptr. 359.). 4 On that subject the trial judge said: 'And this brings us to the next point, the question of consent. I don't weigh the evidence in these things usually unless I can look in the eyes of the witnesses. But here again, I would say this, I don't see the ......
  • 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