Office of the
District Attorney
Alameda County
Nancy E. O'Malley, District Attorney

2010 Editions

Fall 2010 [500 kb]
Summer 2010 [500 kb]
Spring 2010 [500 kb]
Winter 2010 [500 kb]

Articles

Standing
Special Needs Detentions
Entrapment
Investigative Detentions
"Open Carry" Detentions
Exigent Circumstances

Recent Cases

People v. Torres (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 774
ISSUE: After making a pretext traffic stop, did an officer satisfy the requirements for conducting a lawful inventory search of the vehicle?

People v. Camino (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 1359
ISSUE: While questioning a murder suspect, did officers attempt to undermine Miranda by utilizing the prohibited “two step” procedure?

Millender v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2010) 620 F.3d 1016
ISSUE: Was a search warrant invalid on grounds that it was overbroad?

In re D.C. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 978
ISSUES: (1) Did the mother of a minor have the authority to consent to a search of her son’s bedroom? (2) If so, was the search rendered unlawful when the minor objected to it?

U.S. v. Comprehensive Drug Testing (9th Cir. 2010) 621 F.3d 1162
ISSUE: While executing a warrant to search a legitimate business for computer data pertaining to certain clients, did federal agents comply with a court-ordered procedure designed to prevent the inspection and seizure of data pertaining to other clients?

Kentucky v. King
NOTICE: On September 28, 2010 the United States Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Kentucky v. King, a case in which the Court is expected to decide whether a warrantless entry is permissible under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement if the emergency was created by the actions of the officers.

People v. Moore (2010) __ Cal.App.4th __
COURT'S SUMMARY: "Defendant driver races through city streets at excessive speeds. He runs a red light and collides with another car which in turn hits another car. The accident causes death to one victim and serious injury to another. These facts support a murder conviction based on implied malice even though the driver was not under the influence, and was not the object of a pursuit."

People v. Bloom (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1496
ISSUE: Did a police dispatcher make a lawful citizen’s arrest of a man for making annoying or harassing 911 calls?

People v. Williams (2010) 49 Cal.4th 405
ISSUE: Did a murder suspect invnoke his Miranda right to counsel?

People v. Hartsch (2010) 49 Cal.4th 232
ISSUE: Did officers violate a murder suspect’s Sixth Amendment rights when they put him in a cell with his accomplice and secretly recorded their conversation about the crime?

Mickey v. Ayers (9th Cir. 2010) 606 F.3d 1223
ISSUE: Did a conversation between an officer and an arrestee on an extradition flight from Japan constitute “interrogation” under Miranda?

City of Ontario v. Quon (2010) __ U.S. __ [2010 WL 2400087]
ISSUES: (1) Did a police officer have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of text messages that he sent and received over a police-issued paging device? (2) If so, did his supervisors violate his Fourth Amendment rights when they obtained and reviewed transcripts of his messages?

Berghuis v. Thompkins (2010) __ U.S. __ [2010 WL 2160784]
ISSUE: Are officers required to obtain express Miranda waivers before questioning suspects? Or are implied waivers sufficient?

U.S. v. Struckman (9th Cir. 2010) 603 F.3d 731
ISSUE: Did officers have sufficient grounds to enter the backyard of a home to investigate a report of a possible burglary in progress?

U.S. v. King (3d Cir. 2010) 604 F.3d 125
ISSUE: If a person consents to a search of personal property in the person’s home, is the search invalid under the rule of Georgia v. Randolph if, (1) the property is co-owned a spouse or other person who resides in the house, and (2) the co-owner notified officers beforehand that he objected to the search?

U.S. v. Franklin (9th Cir. 2010) 603 F.3d 652
ISSUES: (1) Can a motel room be searched pursuant to the terms of the guest’s probation? (2) Did officers have probable cause to believe that the probationer was living in the motel room they searched?

U.S. v. Ellison (1st Cir. 2010) __ F.3d __ [2010 WL 1493847]
ISSUE: Were officers required to obtain a Miranda waiver before questioning a county jail inmate about a crime for which he was not in custody?

People v. Johnson (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 253
ISSUES: (1) Did investigators utilize unduly suggestive photo and live lineup procedures? (2) Did they obtain a valid Miranda waiver from the defendant?

People v. Shafrir (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1238
ISSUE: If an officer’s decision to tow a vehicle was objectively reasonable, is the towing nevertheless unlawful if the officer’s department did not require that he also consider a standardized list of criteria?

Maryland v. Shatzer (2010) __ U.S. __ [2010 WL 624042]
ISSUE: If a suspect invokes his Miranda right to counsel, may officers seek to interview him at a later time?

Florida v. Powell (2010) __ U.S. __ [2010 WL 605603]
ISSUE: Did officers accurately advise a suspect of his Miranda right to counsel. HELD: Although officers did not expressly inform the suspect that he had a right to have counsel present during an interview, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it was sufficient that they told him, (1) that he had a right to speak with an attorney before questioning, and (2) he could invoke his right to counsel at any time during the interview. But the Court reminded officers that they "have little reason to assume the litigation risk of experimenting with novel Miranda formulations." (Quoting from USA amicus brief).

Bryan v. McPherson (9th Cir. 2009) 590 F.3d 767
ISSUE: Under what circumstances may officers utilize a taser on a suspect?

People v. Navarrete (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 828
ISSUE: During the trial of a man charged with lewd conduct on a child, should the trial judge have declared a mistrial after a detective intentionally violated the court’s order not to inform the jury that the defendant’s statement to officers was suppressed?

People v. C.S.A. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 773
ISSUE: Are prosecutors bound by an agreement between officers and a would-be informant that charges would be dismissed if the informant provided the officers with information?

People v. Lessie (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1152
ISSUE: Does a minor invoke his Miranda rights by requesting to speak with a parent?

People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008
Change to Medical Marijuana Law: On January 21, 2010, the California Supreme Court invalidated Health and Safety Code section 11362.77(a) which set limits on the amount of marijuana that a qualified medical marijuana patent or caregiver canlawfully possess. Instead, the court ruled, that pursuant to the California's Compassionate Use Act, “they may possess an amount of medical marijuana reasonably necessary for their, or their charges’, personal medical needs.”

Greene v. Camreta (9th Cir. 2009) 588 F.3d 1011
ISSUE: Did a sheriff’s deputy and child protective services caseworker violate the Fourth Amendment rights of a young girl by questioning her at school to determine whether she had been molested by her father?
NOTE: See "Forms" section for Camreta application for order, Points and Authorities, Order, and Parental consent form.

U.S. v. Pineda-Moreno (9th Cir. 2010) 591 F.3d 1212
ISSUES: (1) Must officers obtain a search warrant to install a tracking device to the undercarriage of a vehicle? (2) Is a warrant required to walk onto the suspect’s driveway to install the device?

People v. Branner (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 308****
ISSUE: Should evidence be suppressed if it was obtained in accordance with a search that was lawful when officers conducted it but, as the result of a change in the law, was subsequently declared unlawful?
****REVIEW GRANTED: The California Supreme Court has granted review of this decision. It is no longer citable authority.