State v. Castilla-Whitehawk
| Decision Date | 25 May 2021 |
| Docket Number | No. 54141-6-II,54141-6-II |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
| Parties | STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. JIMMY DELA CASTILLA-WHITEHAWK, Appellant. |
MAXA, J. - Jimmy Castilla-Whitehawk appeals his convictions for unlawful possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) with intent to deliver, unlawful possession of a controlled substance (heroin) with intent to deliver, and unlawful possession of a controlled substance (alprazolam). The convictions arose from information that a confidential informant provided to law enforcement regarding a drug transaction Castilla-Whitehawk intended to have with an acquaintance in a store parking lot.
After receiving the information, law enforcement located two cars in the store parking lot and detained Castilla-Whitehawk and the other individual. Castilla-Whitehawk admitted that officers would find drugs in the car he was in. The officers then obtained a search warrant for the car and discovered various controlled substances.
We hold that the trial court did not err by (1) denying Castilla-Whitehawk's motion to suppress evidence based on a lack of probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant because the search warrant affidavit established the confidential informant's basis of knowledge, (2) denying Castilla-Whitehawk's motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement because the informant's information provided a basis for his detention, (3) admitting evidence that an eight-year-old child was present in the car because the probative value of the evidence outweighed its prejudicial effect, and (4) instructing the jury on accomplice liability because the evidence supported the instruction. However, we hold that Castilla-Whitehawk's unlawful possession of a controlled substance conviction must be vacated under State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021).
Accordingly, we affirm Castilla-Whitehawk's two convictions of unlawful possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, but we reverse his unlawful possession of a controlled substance conviction and remand for the trial court to vacate that conviction and for resentencing.
On October 8, 2018, Sergeant Chris Packard of the Thurston County Sheriff's Department detained and handcuffed Castilla-Whitehawk and Timothy Moreno in the parking lot of a Ross Dress for Less store. Packard encountered Castilla-Whitehawk and Moreno because a confidential informant (referred to as CS 959) informed him that Moreno planned to purchase heroin from Castilla-Whitehawk at the Ross store. Packard immediately applied for a search warrant for the vehicle Castilla-Whitehawk was in and for both men. A superior court judge took a sworn, telephonic statement from Packard. A transcript of the statement is titled, "Complaint for Search Warrant."
In the statement, Packard discussed in detail the fact that he has worked with CS 959 in the past and that CS 959 had provided credible and reliable information in several prior cases. Packard stated that CS 959 had provided information regarding Castilla-Whitehawk and Moreno. Packard told the judge the following:
1. Packard knew from previous tips and investigations that both Castilla-Whitehawk and Moreno were drug dealers.
2. That afternoon, CS 959 texted Packard and told him that he/she was driving Moreno to the Ross store to meet with Castilla-Whitehawk in order to buy a few ounces of heroin.
3. CS 959 said that his/her car was a red Honda and Castilla-Whitehawk would be in a silver Mini Cooper. CS 959 later texted Packard from inside the store, stating that he/she would not be coming out.
4. Packard arrived at the Ross store and observed the two cars as described. A person later identified as Moreno was sitting in the driver's seat of the Mini Cooper and Castilla-Whitehawk was sitting in the passenger seat.
5. As Packard approached the car, there was an obvious odor of marijuana coming from the car and smoke was coming out of the sides of the car.
6. Packard removed both Castilla-Whitehawk and Moreno from the car and placed them in handcuffs. A young child also was in the car.
7. Castilla-Whitehawk was holding a fanny pack, and another officer, Officer Brett Curtright, could see some type of cellophane wrapper. Both Packard and Curtright knew from experience that cellophane commonly is used to store narcotics.
8. After Packard gave Castilla-Whitehawk Miranda1 warnings, Castilla-Whitehawk informed him that there was marijuana and "M30s" in the car. Packard knew from experience that M30s referred to prescription Oxycodone. Clerk's Papers (CP) at 26.
9. The marijuana that Castilla-Whitehawk stated would be found in the car was evidence of the crimes of possession of marijuana in a public place and reckless endangerment by smoking marijuana with a child in the car.
The judge found probable cause and authorized the search warrant.
Officers searched the Mini Cooper. Under the front passenger seat - where Castilla-Whitehawk had been seated - officers found a black bag with 86.2 grams of methamphetamine, 34 grams of heroin, and 34 fully and 19 partially intact alprazolam pills. Under the driver's side seat - where Moreno had been seated - police found a zippered blue pouch bag with 57.4 grams of methamphetamine, eight individually packaged bags of heroin in the total amount of 34 grams, a knife, and a digital scale with heroin and methamphetamine residue on it.
Officers searched both men. In the fanny pack that Castilla-Whitehawk had been wearing officers found $1,620 in cash and 17 Oxycodone pills that later were revealed to contain heroin. Police also seized 29 grams of methamphetamine from Castilla-Whitehawk during his transport to jail.
The State charged Castilla-Whitehawk with four counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine, heroin, Oxycodone, alprazolam) with intent to deliver. The State later dismissed the count involving Oxycodone.
Castilla-Whitehawk moved to suppress the evidence seized from the Mini Cooper and from his person. Castilla-Whitehawk argued that probable cause did not exist to issue a search warrant based on CS 959's information because the search warrant affidavit failed to specify CS 959's basis of knowledge.
Castilla-Whitehawk also moved to suppress the statements he made to Packard after being removed from his car. In that motion, Castilla-Whitehawk argued that he had been unlawfully arrested. Therefore, he claimed that the statement he made regarding controlled substances in the Mini Cooper should not have been considered for probable cause to issue the search warrant.
The trial court denied Castilla-Whitehawk's suppression motions and entered findings of fact and conclusions of law. The court concluded that probable cause supported the search warrant. The court also concluded that the informant was credible and had a basis of knowledge for the information provided. Finally, the court concluded that Castilla-Whitehawk had been properly detained.
Castilla-Whitehawk moved to exclude any evidence that there was a child in his car at the time of his arrest based on relevance and prejudice. The State contended that the evidence was necessary to prove the element of possession because Castilla-Whitehawk potentially could argue that the drugs belonged to the other person in the car. The State needed to show that the other person in the car was a child who would be unlikely to be in possession of drugs.
The trial court allowed admission of limited evidence regarding the child. The court did give a limiting instruction, informing the jury that they could consider the evidence only on the issue of possession.
Packard testified that the quantity of drugs found in Castilla-Whitehawk's car, coupled with the money and plastic baggies found on his person, might be indicative of a low scale dealer. He stated that the digital scale found under Moreno's seat typically was used by both purchasers and dealers to weigh their drugs. Packard opined that the evidence did not indicate that Castilla-Whitehawk and Moreno were mere drug users.
Deputy J.D. Strup also testified that the 86.2 grams of methamphetamine found under Castilla-Whitehawk's seat was not a personal use amount. And Strup stated that the amount of heroin and methamphetamine found in Castilla-Whitehawk's vehicle was an amount you would not typically see on a street level user.
Following the close of evidence, Castilla-Whitehawk objected to referencing accomplice liability in the jury instructions because the State failed to charge him as an accomplice or as a principal. The court denied Castilla-Whitehawk's objection. The to-convict jury instructions for all three charges stated that the jury had to find that Castilla-Whitehawk or an accomplice possessed heroin, methamphetamine, and alprazolam with the intent to deliver.
The jury convicted Castilla-Whitehawk of two counts of unlawful possession with intent to deliver (methamphetamine, heroin) and one count of possession of a controlled substance (alprazolam). The trial court determined that his offender score for each conviction was 2 based on the current convictions, which resulted in a standard range sentence for the two possessionwith intent to deliver convictions of 12+ to 20 months. Castilla-Whitehawk was sentenced to total confinement of 14 months.
Castilla-Whitehawk appeals the trial court's order denying his suppression motion and his convictions.
Castilla-Whitehawk argues that probable cause did not support issuance of the search warrant for the Mini Cooper and his person. Specifically, he argues that Packard's statement to the judge failed to show CS 959's basis of knowledge that he was going to commit a crime. We disagree.
A warrant can be issued only if supported by probable cause. State v. Lyons, 174...
To continue reading
Request your trial