In re J.G.
J.G. appeals from an order sustaining a petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, 602) charging him with possession of a controlled substance. He argues the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress because: (1) the police officer used J.s suspected truancy as a pretext to detain him for unrelated criminal activity; (2) the officer did not have J.s express consent to conduct the search; and (3) the officer was unaware J. was subject to a probation search and seizure condition at the time of the search. As we explain below, Court find the encounter was consensual and J. expressly consented to the search, and therefore, Court need not address the other issue. Court affirm the order.
Comments on In re J.G.