P. v. Weathers
Filed 3/21/06 P. v. Weathers CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 EIGHT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERNEST LEE WEATHERS, Defendant and Appellant. | B182029 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA029201) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Christopher G. Estes, Judge. Affirmed.
Rachel Lederman, 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, Kyle S. Brodie and Adrian N. Tigmo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
__________________________
Following denial of his motion to suppress evidence, appellant Ernest Weathers pled nolo contendere to receiving stolen property and a prior strike conviction. He was sentenced to four years in prison. He argues that his motion should have been granted, because (1) the search of his person pursuant to a parole condition was unlawful, and (2) his statements were inadmissible because no Miranda warning was given.[1] We find no merit in either contention, and affirm.
FACTS
Sheriff's Deputy Mark Marbach was the sole witness at the suppression hearing. He testified that he stopped appellant's car in a residential area at 3:30 p.m. because appellant was traveling at 40 miles per hour, 15 miles per hour faster than the speed limit. Appellant was alone in the car. When Marbach told appellant he had been stopped for speeding, he said â€
