P. v. Carillo

Filed 8/17/06 P. v. Carillo CA2/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

JESUS IVAN CARILLO,

Defendant and Appellant.

B182358

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BA262940)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Barbara R. Johnson, Judge. Affirmed.

Thien Huong Tran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Marc E. Turchin and David A. Wildman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________________

Jesus Ivan Carillo appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of no contest to possessing cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351) following the denial of a suppression motion (Pen. Code, § 1538.5). The court sentenced him to prison for two years.

In this case, we conclude the court did not err by only partially granting appellant's motion to unseal the affidavit supporting a search warrant, or by denying his motions to quash the warrant and suppress evidence.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

On April 1, 2004, a magistrate issued a search warrant authorizing the search of, inter alia, the residence of 6553 Gardenia Avenue in Long Beach for cocaine powder and narcotics paraphernalia.[1] The affiant, Los Angeles Police Officer Joe Salazar, stated as follows.

Salazar had been a Los Angeles Police Officer since December 1982, and was currently assigned to central bureau narcotics. Since December 1982, Salazar had been involved in over 1,000 investigations and/or arrests of persons involved in the possession, possession for sale, and sale of cocaine, heroin, marijuana, and PCP. He had received more than 100 hours of classes at the Los Angeles Police Academy, as well as days of divisional training regarding the identification, recognition, sales, packaging, and methods of use of cocaine, heroin, marijuana and PCP. He also had received more than 100 hours of training from the California Narcotics Officers Association.

Salazar had spoken with users and informants regarding the manner in which narcotics transactions, including the narcotics of cocaine, heroin, marijuana and PCP, occur. He also had spoken with users and informants regarding the manner in which cocaine, heroin, marijuana and PCP are packaged for sale and the manner in which sellers store, conceal, sell, and transport narcotics. Salazar had testified as an expert about 100 times regarding possession and possession for sale of controlled substances in municipal, superior, and federal courts.

Salazar also stated as follows. During the week ending April 3, 2004, Salazar received information that two â€

Description	Appeal from the judgment entered following appellant's plea of no contest to possessing cocaine for sale following the denial of a suppression motion. The court sentenced appellant to prison for two years. In this case, this court conclude the court did not err by only partially granting appellant's motion to unseal the affidavit supporting a search warrant, or by denying his motions to quash the warrant and suppress evidence.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.