PEOPLE v. LINDSEY
Filed 4/18/07
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAMAR LINDSEY, Defendant and Appellant. | A113628 (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 5-051007-3) ORDER DENYING REHEARING AND MODIFYING OPINION [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] |
BY THE COURT:
Plaintiffs petition for rehearing is denied. The opinion filed on March 27, 2007, is modified as follows:
1. Delete the fourth sentence from the second paragraph of Factual and Procedural Background, He did recall that the caller was very frightened of retaliation.
2. Delete the third sentence in the eighteenth paragraph under Discussion, Blazer was informed that she was very frightened of retaliation, and replace it with the following language:
Blazer also testified that the area ha[d] our particular interest because of the amount of gang activity, specifically the Norteno gang that is in that area and high level of drug activity that goes on in that area. I have investigated prior homicides and shootings in that area.
3. Delete footnote three and replace it with the following language:
Blazer described the initiation of the patsearch at least three times. He testified at the preliminary hearing that he told defendant he wanted to patsearch him, and at the hearing on the motion to suppress that he needed to patsearch him. He also testified at the suppression hearing that he told defendant, I am going to pat search you. The trial court concluded that the detention began at this point, a reasonable conclusion based on Blazers testimony at the hearing on the motion to suppress.
The above modification does not effect any change in the judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.264(c).)
Dated:
_____________________________P.J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line attorney.
