State v. Jones
| Decision Date | 17 January 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 3134-II,3134-II |
| Citation | 22 Wn.App. 447,591 P.2d 796 |
| Parties | The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Mae Lee JONES, Appellant. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
C. C. Bridgewater, Jr., Longview (appointed), for appellant.
Henry R. Dunn, Pros. Atty., Kelso, for respondent.
Mae Lee Jones was convicted of possessing stolen property of a value in excess of $250, a class C felony defined by RCW 9A.56.160(1)(a) as second-degree possession. Following the trial court's denial of her alternative motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial, she appealed to this court. She contends the trial court erred (1) by denying her motion to suppress evidence, and (2) by permitting the prosecution to present improper "value" evidence. We remand for resentencing pursuant to the gross misdemeanor defined by RCW 9A.56.170 as third-degree possession.
The suppression hearing in the case at bench was held prior to the adoption of CrR 3.6 which requires the hearing judge to enter finding of fact. Nevertheless, a reasonably reliable fact pattern can be discerned from an appellate review of the record.
On May 20, 1977 two police officers, in the course of investigating two "bad checks" apparently drawn by Mae Lee Jones on a closed account, and a report of a missing television set from the Dunes Motel in Cowlitz County, went to a residence occupied by Al Davis, his two minor children, and the defendant, Mae Lee Jones. The police knew that Ms. Jones was employed as a maid at the Dunes Motel. They encountered Mr. Davis outside the residence and advised him they were looking for Ms. Jones. When they inquired whether she had brought home a television set recently, he answered affirmatively and said, "Hey, if it is stolen, I don't want it . . . You guys come on in and look at it if you want."
The police entered the living room of the two-bedroom apartment and examined a relatively new 19-inch portable Quasar color television set with a "very basic, very plain" brown plastic finish. The serial number on the outside of the set had been removed. Davis advised the police he had to go to work, told them Ms. Jones was expected at 4 p. m., and said, "Why don't you come back and talk to her?"
The two officers left the apartment, went to the Dunes Motel, examined several of the motel's television sets, and concluded that they were "identical to the set that was in Mrs. Jones' residence." They were then informed that readily identifiable sheets and other types of bedding were also missing from the motel.
The police then returned to the Davis-Jones residence and waited outside for Ms. Jones. After waiting for approximately 2 hours, Sgt. Steve Scibelli knocked on the door, which was then opened by Davis's 13-year-old son. Scibelli identified himself and inquired whether Ms. Jones was at home. The lad replied,
Scibelli entered the living room; and, looking through the open door of a bedroom, he saw a pile of laundry approximately 10-feet away. On top of the pile was a bed sheet with 3-inch high lettering, which Scibelli could read, identifying it as property of International Dunes. By that time Detective Edwin Nelson had entered the apartment, and Scibelli said, Before Nelson left, however, he peered through the ribs in the back of the television set and obtained the serial number imprinted on the inside of the set. He also looked (inadvertently?) through the open bedroom door and saw a sheet, a blanket and two pillows. Nelson was able to read the large lettering on the sheet, but he was not able (at that distance) to identify the blanket and pillows as property of the Dunes Motel.
Thereafter, Nelson obtained the search warrant, and on his return he and Scibelli (who had remained inside the apartment with the teen-age boy) search the apartment. They took into police custody the television set, a blanket, 2 pillows, 4 pillow cases, 3 bath towels, and 10 queen-size sheets. Some of the bedding and linen were in the bedroom and others (not specifically identified) were found "in the linen closet."
At trial, the executive secretary and office manager of International Dunes Company, a partnership, acknowledged that she could not express an opinion as to the retail or market value of the television set. Nevertheless, she was permitted to testify (1) that it had been purchased at a discounted wholesale value of $282 in April 1976; (2) that the company replaced sets every 5 years, taking a straight line accounting depreciation of 20 percent per year; and that the sets were then sold to a wholesale merchandiser at $60 to $85 per set. In an offer of proof, with the jury absent, she testified that she could only express "a personal opinion" as to fair market value of the set because she had no experience attempting to sell a one-year-old television set and had no experience selling a Quasar set even after a 5-year use. She also testified that the sets were specially designed units for the motel industry with the controls not as easily accessible as models which are sold in the open market.
In the same "offer" she told the court that used motel linens have no market value and that the normal life of an individual item is 3 years. She was then permitted to testify as to the purchase price of the several items of linen seized by the police which had been purchased approximately a year before being taken into police custody.
These cost figures, depreciated in a straight line for one year, arguably produced a "value" in excess of $250 for the Combined total of All items seized. There was no other testimony as to the value of the items taken from the apartment, but substantial evidence was admitted to prove that they were the property of the Dunes Motel.
We turn first to the search and seizure issue. The defendant concedes that the police officers' first entry into the apartment was gained at the specific invitation of a cotenant with his express consent to search the television set. However, she contends (1) the officers' second entry, at the 13-year-old boy's invitation after he had advised the police that Ms. Jones was not at home, was an unlawful entry and did not constitute justification for the intrusion which preceded Scibelli's and Nelson's "plain view" observation of the sheet in the bedroom; (2) regardless of the sufficiency of the minor's consent to enter, there was no consent to Officer Nelson's subsequent "search" of the television set by peering through the ribs to find an identification number; and (3) Officer Scibelli's act of remaining in the apartment in order to "secure" the premises constituted an unlawful seizure of the property without benefit of the search warrant which Nelson subsequently obtained. The defendant also challenges the sufficiency and accuracy of the affidavit upon which the search warrant was issued. For the reasons set forth below, however, we do not reach the issues which challenge the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Grega
...of defendant's room clearly restricted to single search when she afterwards locked door and retained key); State v. Jones, 22 Wash.App. 447, 591 P.2d 796, 799 (Wash.Ct.App.1979) (invitation to examine television set not consent to later search of entire apartment). Finally, we note that the......
-
IN RE J.M., 90-FS-183
...Scott, 82 Or. App. 645, 729 P.2d 585 (1986); In re Jermaine, 399 Pa. Super. 503, 582 A.2d 1058 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1990), State v. Jones, 22 Wn. App. 447, 591 P.2d 796 (1979). 2. The maturity, sophistication, and street savvy of this youthful drug courier/entrepreneur were exemplified by his te......
-
State v. Thompson
...own Court of Appeals, which allow minors to validly consent to a police search given the right circumstances. See State v. Jones, 22 Wash.App. 447, 451-52, 591 P.2d 796 (1979) (upholding a 13-year-old's consent to enter the home, where police saw incriminating evidence in plain view);15see ......
-
In the Matter of The Pers. Restraint Petition of Mansour Heidari
...252 (2001) (first degree robbery reduced to second degree robbery where the jury was instructed on both crimes); State v. Jones, 22 Wash.App. 447, 454, 591 P.2d 796 (1979) (possessing stolen property in the second degree reduced to possessing stolen property in the third degree where the ju......
-
Survey of Washington Search and Seizure Law
...child, in appropriate circumstances, may consent to a search of the parent's home. See, e.g., State v. Jones, 22 Wash. App. 447, 451-52, 591 P.2d 796, 799 (1979) (thirteen-year-old child's invitation to enter apartment in which child resided was legally sufficient consent, absent any eviden......
-
Survey of Washington Search and Seizure Law: 1988 Update
...child, in appropriate circumstances, may consent to a search of the parent's home. See, e.g., State v. Jones, 22 Wash. App. 447, 451-52, 591 P.2d 796, 799 (1979) (thirteen-year-old child's invitation to enter apartment in which child resided was legally sufficient consent, absent any eviden......
-
Survey of Washington Search and Seizure Law: 1998 Update
...child, in appropriate circumstances, may consent to a search of the parent's home. See, e.g., State v. Jones, 22 Wash. App. 447, 451-52, 591 P.2d 796, 799 (1979) (thirteen-year-old's invitation to enter apartment in which child resided was legally sufficient consent, absent any evidence tha......
-
Survey of Washington Search and Seizure Law: 2005 Update
...Child The defendant's child, in appropriate circumstances, may consent to police entry of the parent's home. See, e.g.. State v. Jones, 22 Wn. App. 447, 451-52, 591 P.2d 796, 799 (1979) (reasoning that a minor child may consent to entry, but declining to rule on the legal question of consen......