People v. White

• Citation: 4 Cal.Rptr. 261,180 Cal.App.2d 99
• Decision Date: 20 April 1960
• Docket Number: Cr. 6993
• Court: California Court of Appeals
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Joseph WHITE, Defendant and Appellant.

Page 261

4 Cal.Rptr. 261

180 Cal.App.2d 99

PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Joseph WHITE, Defendant and Appellant.

Cr. 6993.

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

April 20, 1960.

Joseph White, in pro. per.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., David R. Cadwell, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

FOX, Presiding Justice.

Defendant was convicted of violating section 11500 of the Health and Safety Code, a felony (possession of heroin). He has appealed from the judgment.

Acting on information furnished by an arrestee that narcotics would be found in the room of one Griggs, in the Lincoln Hotel in Los Angeles, Officers Alexander and Heldoorn proceeded to said hotel to investigate. They discovered that he occupied Room 65. Upon going to that room the officers were given permission by Griggs to search it, but found no narcotics. While still in the hotel, the officers received information from defendant's wife that they should investigate Room 60. They went to Room 60 and knocked on the door. Defendant opened the door and, when he did so, the officers observed on the floor and on the table a whitish powder that resembled heroin. They also observed on the table a quantity of various colored balloons. They then entered the room and placed the defendant under arrest. There was an air-well outside the window of this room. The officers recovered therefrom six colored balloons, inside of which they found quantities of a whitish powder. They also found a whitish powder, some of which they retrieved, on the soles of defendant's shoes. It was the opinion of William King, a qualified forensic chemist, that the white powder in question was heroin. At the scene of the arrest, defendant said to Officer Heldoorn, 'There is enough stuff in this room to send me back to the joint. Can't we make a deal?' He admitted to the officer that he knew the balloons retrieved from the air-well had been in the room. He explained that he was on parole and had to get rid of the stuff. On examining the condition of the screen of the window opening on the air-well, the officers discovered that it had been ripped.

Defendant was the manager of the hotel. However, he was not living in Room had A tenant by the name of Henry Young had been occupying it; his rent was paid up to April 27th, the date of defendant's arrest. He left that night. Defendant did a little tailoring work. He testified that Bob Farris came to the hotel to buy a suit from Young, and that his wife suggested that he go up with Farris to see the suit. Defendant testified that the officers knocked on the door and identified themselves as police officers and that when he opened the door they walked right in. He denied making the statements to which the officers testified. Defendant explained that Young, the tenant, had gone out to buy some whiskey at the time of the arrest, and that he had not seen him since. Farris was over by the window when the officers entered the room.

In seeking a reversal defendant contends (1) that the heroin was illegally admitted into evidence on the theory that it was obtained through an illegal search and seizure; (2) that the white powder found in his possession was never shown, by a qualified forensic chemist, to be a narcotic since this evidence was introduced by way of stipulation; and (3) that the court lacked jurisdiction to try this case because a previous complaint, charging him with the same offense, had been dismissed at a prior preliminary hearing. We find no merit in any of these contentions.

A police officer may make an arrest without a warrant when he has reason to believe a felony is being committed in his presence (Pen.Code, § 836), and may make a search as an incident to a lawful arrest without obtaining a search warrant. People v. Winston, 46 Cal.2d 151, 162, 293 P.2d 40. In the instant case, defendant voluntarily opened the door to Room 60 when the officers knocked. They observed a whitish powder on the table and on the floor and also a quantity of balloons on the table. The officers made these observations before entering the room and concluded that this looked like a narcotic operation. The law is settled that an officer may look through an open aperture in a person's home without violating that person's constitutional rights. People v. Martin, 45 Cal.2d 755, 762, 290 P.2d 855; People v. Castro, 176 Cal.App.2d 325, 1 Cal.Rptr. 231; People v. Hen Chin, 145 Cal.App.2d 583, 586, 303 P.2d 18. If such observations reveal to the officer sufficient facts to lead him to believe a felony is being committed, he may...