Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons California Agencies California Documents 1960 Probable Cause to Arrest and Admissibility of Evidence Bonnie Lee Martin Office ofh t e Attorney General Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_agencies Part of the Evidence Commons Recommended Citation Martin, Bonnie Lee, "Probable Cause to Arrest and Admissibility of Evidence" (1960). California Agencies. Paper 252. http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_agencies/252 This Cal State Document is brought to you for free and open access by the California Documents at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in California Agencies by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROBABlE CAUSE TO ARREST AND ADMISSIBILITY OF IDENCE By BONNIE lEE MARTIN Deputy Attorney General of the State of California Authorized by STANLEY MOSK Attorney General of the State of California 1960 Revised Edition Sold by PRINTING DIVISION, DOCUMENTS SECTION Sacramento 14, California Price $1.25, plus tax PREFACE Following the decision in People v. Cahan, in April of 1955, Cali­ fornia adopted as a judicially declared rule of evidence, that illegally obtained evidence would be inadmissible in a criminal proceeding. There are only a few general statutes governing the laws of arrest which aid the court and police officers in determining whether a given arrest is lawful and a search and seizure of evidence proper. 'l'hus it remained for judicial decisions to define and answer the problems which have arisen in this area. Since our digest systems are never quite current and since to my knowledge, these cases have never been compiled and thoroughly in­ dexed, it was felt that such a work as this 1vas needed. The first print­ ing of this syllabus was a compilation of cases following the Cahan decision through December 10, 1957. Since that time there have been significant changes and additional refinements in the law, particularly in regard to confidential informers. 'rhis revised edition includes the California cases relating to searches and seiznres and probable cause to arrest through January 1, 1960, as well as those cases reported in the earlier edition. BoNNIE LEE l\IARTIN Deputy Attorney General 3 TOPICAL INDEX Page INTRODUCTION: The Exclusionary Rule ~­ L WHAT CO:{STI'l'UTES AN ARREST ~ 15 II. LEGALITY OF ARREST 17 A. With a Warrant ~~~~~ 17 B. Without a ·warranL--~~ 19 1. By Peace 0 fficers 19 2. Private Persons 21 3. Con1n1itted Pres0nce 23 C. Presumption of Leg-ality of Arrest and 25 Ill. RIGHT TO SUSPECTS OR WITNESSEJS 27 A. In 27 B. Outdoors 29 33 IV. WHAT CONSTITUTES REASONABLEi OH PHOHA HLE CA r~ll'i TO BELTE\VE AHRIGSTf~E HAS COJ'vL:\HTTED FI~LONY A. General ::;;; 1. 2. 39 B. 41 41 41 45 47 49 51 5~ 5!) 57 59 61 63 GD 67 67 Gfl 71 Iii 12. 75 1 S1 85 14. 89 15. 91 16. 93 17. 97 18. Counterfeiting 99 19. Sex Offenses 101 C. Inforn1er Cases 103 1. Reliable Information lOB a. Reliable Confidential Informant - 103 b. Police Officers and Radio Broadcasts 109 Information From Ordinary Citizen 111 d. Informant Known to Police Officers 113 2. Information u;; Corroborated _____ _ 3. Revealing of Inforn1ant a. Infonnation is Basis Probal,Ie b. Informer Is a Participant or a Material c. Nondisclosure Not Prejudicial Error d. Defendant Must Request That Identity of Informer Be Revealed 133 e. Name of Informant Unknuwn 135 f. Prosecution Need Not Produce InformanL_ 137 g. Need Kot Be Revealed ___ -~ 139 D. Heasonable to Search Vehicle ~--- 1. General Rule ~~~~~~~~ _ a. Reasonable Cause to Believe Contraband Contained 'l'herein 5 TOPICAL INDEX-Continued Page b. Distinction Between Homes and Automobiles c. Impounded Vehicle Traffic Violations and Automobile ___________________ _ 3. Defendant Arrested From Vehicle __________________________ _ V. REASONABLENESS OF' THE SEARCH -------------- ...--\. General Definition 1. Question of Law ---------------------------- _ B. Search as Incident to Lawful Arrest 1. May Be Before or After Arrest ------·- 2. Exploratory Searches _____________________ _ C. Need Not Procure Search Warrant 163 D. Consent -------------------------------------- 165 Substitute for Reasonable Cause or Seareh Vvarrant lGG of Fact and Burden of Proof __ _ by Defendant ------------- Consent by Another ______ -----------------· a. Person in Joint Possession __________________________ _ b. Apparent Authority _______________________________________________ _ Voluntary Nature of Consent Defendant in Custody Coercion 6. Cannot Go Search of Pren1ises Licensee -~- to Enter to Render Aid ____ _ -- 18Z. a Search and Used Conversation and Mechanical Which Is Patent Person and Use of Force G. Arrest and Search for One Crime Turns Up Evidence Bearing on a Dif­ ferent Crime ---------------------------- 1-I. Area of Search 1. Premises Under Control of 2. Defendant Arrested Away 3. Or;en Fields and \Voods Duration of Cannot De .Justified YI. INFOHMING ARHESTEE OF' A. B. c. Excuses for Failure to 1. Unrelated to Securing to Use Caution VIII. RELY ON RIGHTS OF' OTHr;ns ------ IX. STATEMENTS MADE DURING ILLEGAL DETENTION X. TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS UNHELATED TO SECUHING EVIDENCE XI. TESTIMONY HELATING TO PHOBABLE A. ::Ylust Testify to Details of Information 227 XII. OBJECTIONS ::YIUST BE MADE AT TRIAL TO RAISE ON APPEAL __ _ A. Preliminary Motions In Advance of Trial B. vVrit of Prohibition to Review Huling on Admissibility of XIIL TESTIMONY RELATING TO EVIDENCE UNLAWFULLY IS INADMISSIBLE XIV. XV. \Vhat May Be 1. Statements 2. 4. 6 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CITED CASES Page Agnello v. United States, 46 S. Ct. 4, 269 T:.S. 20_ l:J5, 198 Allen v. }\IcCoy_ 135 Cal. App. 500 -- --- 209 Amos v. United States, 41 S. Ct. 17fl Arata v. Superior Court, 153 Cal. 17 Badillo v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 2:J, 52, 231 Breithaupt v. Abram, 77 S. Ct. 408, 352 U.S. 434 (N.M.) ____ _ 71, 172, 191 Brinegar v. United States, 69 S. Ct. 1302, 338 U.S. 160 __ _ 141 Cash v. Superior Court, 53 A.C. 73. 239, 247 Castiel v. Superior Court, 162 Cal. App. 2d 710 _____ _ -- 243 Cooley v. State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers, 141 Cal. App. 2d 293_ ___________________________________________________ 183, 189 Cordry v. Superior Court, 161 Cal. App. 2d 267_ _ _____ 2~9 Coverstone v. Davies, 38 Cal. 2d 315 19 Coy v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 2d 471._______ _ ______ 133 De Losa v. Superior Court, 166 Cal. App. 2d L 127, 1~4. 24:1 Dixon, In re, 41 Cal. 2d 756--- ___________ ____ ___ 99, 171 Fobbs v. City of Los Angeles, 154 Cal. App. 2d 464 ------------ 19 Funk v. Superior Court, 52 A. C. 436_ __ ______________ 242, 247, 251 Gascon v. Superior Court, 169 Cal. App. 2d 356__ .52, 59, 87, 150 Gibson v. J. C. Penney, 165 Cal. App. 2d 6•10_ 37, 38 Gisske v. Sanders, 9 Cal. App. 13---- _ 29, 49, 63 Harris v. United States, 67 S. Ct. 1098, 331 U.S. 145____ 201 Hatjis v. Superior Court, 144 Cal. App. 2d 426_ ___ 25, 79, 121 Hernandez v. Superior Court, 143 Cal. App. 2d 20 __ 65, 86, 197 Hester v. United States, 44 S. Ct. 445, 26!i U.S. 57___________ _ 199 Johnson v. United States, 68 S. Ct. 367, 333 U.S. 10__________ 179 Lorenzen v. Superior Court, 150 Cal. App. 2d 506 38, 103, 106, 133, 163 McAllister v. Superior Court, 165 Cal. App. 2d 297 ______ _____ 221, 240 ::\icCarthy v. Superior Court, 162 Cal. 2d 7G5 _ _____ 239 ::\fitchel! v. Superior Court, 50 Cal. 2d ___ 127, 131 Montgomery v. Superior Court, 146 Cal. 66a, 77, 109 Panzich v. United Statee, 285 Fed. 87L - 231 People v. Acosta, 142 Cal. App. 2d 59 78 People v. Adame, Cal. App. 2d 587.. 66a, 157 People v. Alaniz, 149 Cal. App. 2d 560. 125, 197 People v. Alcala, 169, CaL App. 2d 468. _ 139, 157 People v. Alesi, 169, Cal. App. 2d 758 119, 139 People v. Alexander, 168 Cal. App. 2d 753 _ 137 People v. Allen, 142 Cal. 2d 267 - 157, 163, 165, 221 People v. Alvarez, 154 Cal. 2d 694-- 127, 133 People v. Alvidrez, 158 Cal. 2d 2!J9 . __ 133, 229 People v. Amado, 167 Cal. App. 2d 3,15 53, 120, 133 People v. Ambrose, 155 Cal. App. 2d 513 ~-55, 6~ 93,176,190 People v. Ames, 151 Cal. App. 2d 714_ _38, 101, 109 People v. Anders, 167 Cal. App. 2d 65 .53, 150 People v. Anderson, 145 Cal. App. 2d 20L _____ _ 187 People v. Andrews, 153 Cal. App. 2d 333_ __ 106 People v. Arter, 169 Cal. 2d 439_ ______ _ 230 People v. Asheraft, 138 Cal. 2d 820 --~--- _ 177 People v. Augustine, 152 Cal. 264 ____ _ -- 54, 57, 78, 106 People v. A vas, 144 Cal. App. - 187 People v. Baker, 135 Cal. App. 2d --- .147, 150 People v. Baker, 170 Cal. App. 2d 240 ... 105, 128 People v. Ball, 162 Cal. App. 2d 465 ______ _ __21, 157, 165 People v. Baltazar, 1ii9 Cal. App. 2d 595 __________ _ 105 People v. Barnett, lfJG Cal. 2d SOL _____ ------ 217 People v. Bashor, 48 Cal. 2d 221 People v. Bates, 163 Cal. 120 People v. Beard, 46 Cal. 207 People v. Berger, 44 Cal. 2d 459 ~---------------- _ 235 People v. Bernal, 174 A.C.A. 836 _____ _ 159 Peoplev.Berve, 51 Cal. 2d 286 __ --------- 237 People v. Best, 172 A.C.A. 139 People v. Blankenship, 171 A.C.A. 64_ _______ _ People v. Blodgett, 46 Cal. 2d 114-_________ ------- People v. Bock Leung Chew, H2 Cal.