536 P.2d 1081 | Ariz. Ct. App. | 1975
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Appellees have filed a contemptuous and scurrilous motion for rehearing and have in conjunction therewith filed a motion to modify the record asking us to allow them to file attached “Finding of Facts”.
After the filing of our opinion in this case the Public Defender had the trial court make the following “Finding of Facts”:
“1. Officer Milne did not observe the lack of a rear license plate on the pickup prior to making the radio broadcast to Officer Giles.
2. Neither Officer Giles nor Inspector Weaver observed the missing rear license plate prior to making the decision to stop defendant’s pick-up.
3. After observing the demeanor of the witnesses testifying on behalf of the State, the Court concluded that the State, failed to prove by a preponderance of credible evidence that the stop was based upon the fact that the pick-up was missing a rear license plate and not upon the ‘stolen vehicle profile.’ ” (Emphasis added)
We first note that the trial court was without jurisdiction to make its so-called “Finding of Facts” since jurisdiction is lost when an appeal is perfected except as to those matters which are in furtherance of the appeal. For that reason we denied the Motion to Modify the Record.
In any event, the “Finding of Facts” solicited from the trial court does nothing to improve appellees’ position. It
The facts in this case conclusively show there was probable cause to arrest appellee Sergheyev because of the .lack of a rear license plate. The motion for rehearing is denied.