P. v. Salazar
Filed
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(San Joaquin)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CYNTHIA SALAZAR, Defendant and Appellant. | C051745 (Sup.Ct.No. SF095495A) |
The People appeal from a trial court order dismissing the case after the court granted defendant's suppression motion. (Pen. Code, § 1538.5.) Defendant Cynthia Salazar initially responds that the appeal should be dismissed because the People attempt to appeal from a dismissal granted upon the prosecutor's motion; we disagree, and conclude the court's dismissal of the action was made by the court on its own motion. We also find that the trial court erroneously granted defendant's suppression motion, and reverse.
BACKGROUND
Stockton Police Officer Robert Chambers, the sole witness at the suppression hearing, testified that he and his partner, Officer Dana Mosher, conducted a traffic stop of a Nissan Maxima for not having a license plate light. Defendant was the driver; her passenger was Jesus Ochoa.
When she was pulled over, defendant could not provide a valid driver's license. Officer Chambers checked the address and social security information defendant provided and learned her driver's license had expired and she had no outstanding warrants. He also learned that Ochoa had a valid driver's license, and no outstanding warrants.
After the officers determined defendant had no valid license, they decided to seize and impound the vehicle. Officer Chambers's written report cites Vehicle Code section 14602.6[1] as authority for impounding the car. The officers removed defendant from the car, and conducted an inventory search of its contents. In the glove compartment, Officer Chambers noticed plastic bags containing a white crystal-like substance which later proved to be methamphetamine.
Defendant was charged with transporting methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379), possessing it for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378), and driving without a license (Veh. Code, § 12500, subd. (a)).
She then moved to suppress the methamphetamine seized from her car, arguing that the inventory search was illegal because the statute authorizing officers to â€
