Drug Evidence Suppressed When Police Improperly Stop Vehicle

La Habra police officer Nick Wilson observed Defendant Paul Carmona make a right turn without using his turn signals. Wilson was about 40 yards away and traveling in the opposite direction, so he was unaffected by Carmona’s turn. There was no other traffic nearby. Wilson, however, believed the turn violated California Vehicle Code § 22107 and stopped Carmona.

Wilson then asked Carmona if he was on parole and Carmona said he was. Wilson proceeded to search the car, finding 7.1 grams of methamphetamine and cellular telephones with text messages relating to narcotics transactions. Wilson also searched Carmona’s passenger, finding a “tooter” used to snort meth.

Carmona and his passenger were then charged in Fullerton Superior Court with two felonies: first, a violation of Health and Safety Code § 11379(a), transportation of a controlled substance, and second, a violation of Health and Safety Code § 11378, possession of a controlled substance. Due to Carmona’s prior prison record and one prior strike, he faced one year sentence enhancements under Penal Code § 667.

Carmona and his passenger filed a motion to suppress under Penal Code § 1538.5, arguing Wilson lacked reasonable suspicion to believe there was a violation of Vehicle Code § 22107. This code section prohibits a turning movement without an appropriate signal “in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.”

At the suppression hearing, Wilson agreed that Carmona’s right turn did not affect his safety because he was so far away. However, the trial court found Carmona violated Vehicle Code § 22108, which requires a driver to signal for 100 feet prior to turning. Accordingly, the trial court denied the motion.

Carmona and his passenger then entered into a plea bargain, wherein Carmona was sentenced to two years in prison after the trial judge struck Carmona’s sentence enhancements. Carmona’s passenger was sentenced to three years of formal probation.

Carmona and his passenger then appealed the ruling on the suppression motion. In People v. Carmona (2011 DJDAR 7744), the Fourth Appellate District agreed with Carmona, reversing the trial court.

The appellate court first decided that Vehicle Code § 22108 only applied in the context of 22107 – if there was no other traffic to be affected, 22108 did not apply. Second, in addressing the propriety of Wilson’s stop, the court commented:

If the defendant does not actually break the law, the officer’s mistaken belief that there has been a violation adds nothing to the probable cause equation. In other words, “if an officer simply does not know the law, and makes a stop based upon objective facts that cannot constitute a violation, his suspicions cannot be reasonable. The chimera created by his imaginings cannot be used against the driver.”

In re Justin K. (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 695, 700.

The appellate court then sent the case back to the Fullerton court with directions to reverse its ruling on the motion to suppress and to allow defendants to withdraw their pleas. Mr. Carmona and his passenger surely had to be happy with this ruling.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Greg Hill, Greg Hill and Associates
This article was written by Greg Hill. He has defended hundreds of drug cases involving traffic stops all over Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino County. He also defends drug offenses, DUI’s, domestic all over the state of California. He is an attorney in Torrance, California and a former Marine Officer. He is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate (B.S., 1987), Boston University graduate (M.B.A., 1994) and Loyola Law School graduate (J.D., 1998).

Copyright Greg Hill & Associates
More information about Greg Hill & Associates