P. v. Inman
Police officers entered the apartment of defendant and secured the premises during a two hour wait for a search warrant. After defendant's motion to suppress evidence was denied, he entered a guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine for purposes of sale (Health and Saf. Code, S 11378). On appeal, he challenges the trial court's denial of the suppression motion, contending (1) the officers entered his apartment without complying with knock-notice requirements; (2) the search warrant was not supported by probable cause because it was based on information collected after (a) the officers' illegal warrantless entry and (b) the officers' illegal arrest of defendant. Lastly, defendant contends that because the statement of probable cause omitted critical information, the trial court erred by denying his motion to traverse the search warrant. After reviewing the sealed portion of the statement of probable cause, court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Inman