People v. Williams CA3
C078391
| Cal. Ct. App. | Oct 4, 2016Background
- Sacramento PRCS officers went to the home of Donald Williams to conduct a routine postrelease-community-supervision (probation) compliance check. Donald was not outside when officers arrived; defendant and two others were in the driveway.
- Defendant yelled into the house something like “the cops are here” toward a bedroom window whose blinds were drawn; that bedroom door was locked and the window nearest it was open.
- Officers detained people found in the kitchen, then obtained a key (from someone on scene) and Officer Shippen used it to unlock and enter the locked bedroom to perform a protective sweep.
- During the cursory sweep Shippen observed shotgun shells in plain view on a dresser; after consent to search was revoked, officers obtained a warrant and seized a shotgun, ammunition, and a benefits card in defendant’s name.
- Defendant moved to suppress the evidence as the product of an unlawful warrantless search; the trial court denied the motion, defendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, and appealed. The Court of Appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Williams) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers were permitted to perform a warrantless protective sweep of a locked bedroom during a probation compliance visit | Protective sweep justified by specific, articulable facts: (1) subject of the visit (Donald) not outside; (2) defendant yelled a warning toward the locked bedroom; (3) only that door was locked; clutter created hiding places; officer experience—together gave reasonable suspicion of danger | Officers lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion — at best a hunch; obtaining the bedroom key from someone outside suggests the person who locked door was outside; locking door and yelling do not justify entry into a private bedroom of a non-probationer | Court held the totality of circumstances gave reasonable, articulable suspicion to justify a limited protective sweep; plain-view ammunition permissible to seize and a warrant was later obtained for full search. |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (protective-sweep exception permits a cursory inspection of spaces where a person may be found to insure officer safety)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (reasonable-suspicion totality-of-the-circumstances analysis; courts must afford officers’ inferences)
- People v. Ledesma, 106 Cal.App.4th 857 (protective sweep permissible prior to probation search where safety concerns and circumstances justify it)
- People v. Ormonde, 143 Cal.App.4th 282 (protective sweep not justified by generalized safety concerns where facts did not support reasonable suspicion)
- People v. Celis, 33 Cal.4th 667 (officer’s generalized past experience cannot alone supply reasonable suspicion for protective sweep)