P. v. Larson CA2/5
Following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, Lee Larson (defendant) pleaded no contest to first degree residential burglary. On appeal, he argues the trial court erred when it denied his suppression motion and when it ordered him to pay the cost of his defense without first finding he had the ability to pay.
We hold that the facts found by the trial court on the motion to suppress were supported by substantial evidence and, based on those facts, the trial court correctly concluded the arresting officer had a reasonable suspicion that defendant was involved in criminal activity. We therefore affirm the denial of the suppression motion. We further hold that the order requiring defendant to pay the cost of his defense must be reversed and remanded with instructions to determine whether defendant had the ability to pay.
Comments on P. v. Larson CA2/5