(Super. Ct. No. 10F01430)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Duarte , J.
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, defendant Henry Correa pled no contest to possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) with an enhancement for over one kilogram in weight (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.4, subd. (b)(1)) and two counts of child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a)). Defendant also admitted he had a strike prior (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (b)-(i); 1170.12) and a prior drug-related conviction (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.2, subd. (a)).*fn1 Sentenced to 13 years in prison, defendant appeals. He contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the information in the affidavit supporting the search warrant was stale and incorrect.
Defendant also requests that this court review the sealed portion of the affidavit. We have reviewed the sealed portion of the affidavit and find it provides ample probable cause to support the search warrant. We affirm.
Defendant lived with Danielle Gallego and her two young children at 9042 Epernay Court. On March 3, 2010, a search of the defendant's master bedroom in his residence revealed he possessed three and one-half pounds of methamphetamine, cash, and scales. After he was arrested, defendant admitted he possessed and sold methamphetamine. He had three pounds of the drug in a Foster Farms Mini Corn Dog box stuffed between mattresses; another half pound was in a floor safe in his bedroom. When the officers entered by kicking in the bedroom door, Gallego's two-year-old son was present in the room. The methamphetamine had a street value of $40,000.
Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because the information set forth in the affidavit to establish probable cause was stale and incorrect. The affidavit contained information from a confidential informant who had revealed a year earlier that defendant was a dealer in half and whole pounds of methamphetamine. The affidavit stated defendant had two prior convictions for possession for sale, when in fact he had only one such conviction. Recognizing that a portion of the affidavit was sealed, defendant asks this court to review that sealed portion.
The Attorney General concedes that the public portion of the affidavit does not provide probable cause for the search warrant and joins the request for this court to ...