P. v. Dhillon CA5
Defendant Sundeep Dhillon was subjected to a warrantless search of his residence based on the searching officer’s erroneous belief defendant was on “searchable” probation. Following the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, defendant pled no contest to various offenses. Defendant’s appointed appellate counsel asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We sent a letter to defendant, advising him of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Defendant responded with a supplemental brief in which he contended the magistrate erred in applying the good faith exception to deny defendant’s motion to suppress. Defendant argued that because the motion should have been granted, defense counsel was ineffective for failing to renew the motion in the superior court to preserve the issue for appeal. We ordered appellate counsel
Comments on P. v. Dhillon CA5