From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Barnes

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Sep 8, 2011
B230671 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2011)

Opinion

B230671

09-08-2011

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KETHEN BARNES, Defendant and Appellant.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA376347) THE COURT:

BOREN, P. J., DOI TODD, J., ASHMANN-GERST, J.

Appellant Kethen Barnes appeals from the denial of his motion under Penal Code section 1538.5 after his plea of "no contest" to one count of possession of a controlled substance, in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a). Appellant admitted having suffered a 2004 conviction for a serious or violent felony. In accordance with the plea bargain, the trial court sentenced appellant to prison for the low term of 16 months, doubled to 32 months because of appellant's strike conviction. The trial court awarded 124 actual days and 62 conduct credit days for a total of 186 days of credit.

We appointed counsel to represent appellant on this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an "opening brief" containing an acknowledgment that he had been unable to find any arguable issues. On June 8, 2011, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.

At the hearing on appellant's motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5, Officer Christopher Gibson testified that on the evening of September 26, 2010, he observed appellant standing shirtless on top of a high cement wall, flexing his muscles and screaming. He appeared to be "under the influence of something." Officer Gibson and his training officer, Officer Churchill, talked appellant down off the wall, and Officer Churchill placed him in handcuffs. Officer Gibson began to conduct a field interview to obtain appellant's name, date of birth, and address prior to performing a want and warrant check. Officer Gibson noticed a large tattoo of the Village Town Pyrus gang on appellant's back. Based on that observation, Officer Churchill called for a gang unit. Officer Gibson testified that when patrol officers stop someone with gang tattoos they can call a gang unit to come and talk to the gang member. A gang unit was available, and the gang officers arrived before Officer Gibson had completed his field interview of appellant.

Officer Luis Interiano of the Olympic Division Gang Unit testified that he arrived within five minutes of being called. After the field interview card was completed and while Officer Gibson was checking for warrants, Officer Interiano spoke with appellant. He asked appellant if he used drugs, and appellant replied that he used crystal methamphetamine. Officer Interiano asked for and received permission from appellant to pat him down. Officer Interiano felt a bulge in appellant's right sock. Appellant said, "Okay, you got me." Officer Interiano saw the contraband when he looked inside the bulge.

The trial court denied the motion to suppress. The trial court found there was reasonable suspicion to detain appellant for either disturbing the peace under Penal Code section 415 or for being under the influence of drugs under Health and Safety Code section 11550. The trial court found that appellant gave valid consent to search to Officer Interiano. There was no Fourth Amendment violation.

We have examined the entire record, including the Pitchess in camera hearing and the hearing on appellant's Marsden motion. We are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess).

People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden).
--------

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.


Summaries of

People v. Barnes

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Sep 8, 2011
B230671 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2011)
Case details for

People v. Barnes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. KETHEN BARNES, Defendant and…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

Date published: Sep 8, 2011

Citations

B230671 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 8, 2011)