People v. Adams CA2/6
B259870
| Cal. Ct. App. | Aug 15, 2016Background
- Officers stopped Lee Adams after observing a risky right turn; Adams parked legally on a residential street and was approached by officers.\
- Officer Brearley opened the driver’s door, smelled burnt marijuana, and saw medical-marijuana-style green containers and a labeled container in the center console.\
- A records check showed Adams’s license was suspended but DMV notice had been returned unclaimed; Adams was not given a citation or arrested at the time.\
- Officers decided to tow the car and Officer Fox conducted an inventory search that produced methamphetamine inside the green container.\
- Trial court denied Adams’s suppression motion, finding probable cause to arrest for reckless driving and that the search was valid as incident to arrest; Adams was convicted and sentenced (later reduced to a misdemeanor).\
- Adams also moved under Pitchess for officers’ personnel records alleging fabrication/false reporting; the trial court limited its in-camera review and found no discoverable documents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of search as incident to arrest | Police had probable cause to arrest for reckless driving/suspended license, justifying search incident to arrest | No arrest occurred; Gant forbids search incident to arrest when arrestee not within reaching distance or vehicle unlikely to contain evidence | Court rejected incident-to-arrest justification; remanded to decide automobile-exception basis |
| Validity of impound/inventory under community caretaking | Statutory authority and caretaking concerns justified impound and inventory search | Impound was objectively unreasonable: driver not arrested, car legally parked, no evidence of risk or obstruction | Court held community caretaking justification not shown and impound objectively unreasonable |
| Automobile-exception search (probable cause from marijuana odor/containers) | Officers smelled marijuana and observed marijuana-style containers and label, giving probable cause to search vehicle and containers | Adams disputed odor and claimed officers conspired to fabricate smell; factual dispute unresolved below | Court remanded for trial court to resolve factual dispute about marijuana odor and then determine automobile-exception justification |
| Pitchess discovery of officer personnel records | Trial court should disclose complaints about fabrication/dishonesty by both officers, including fabrication of evidence and false reports | Trial court limited review to certain Brearley false-report complaints and denied broader requests | Court found discoverable Pitchess material existed (fabrication/dishonesty) for Brearley and Fox; ordered in-camera review and disclosure of any responsive material |
Key Cases Cited
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (search-incident-to-arrest limits when arrestee not within reaching distance and vehicle unlikely to contain evidence)\
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (automobile-exception permits search of containers when probable cause to search vehicle)\
- New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (police may search passenger compartment and containers after lawful custodial arrest)\
- Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (reasonable mistake of law can support reasonable suspicion/probable cause in some circumstances)\
- People v. Redd, 48 Cal.4th 691 (prosecution bears burden to justify warrantless search)\
- Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367 (inventory searches and relevance of officer motivation)