Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People v. Jesus Buitron

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)


May 15, 2012

THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
JESUS BUITRON, JR., DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

(Super. Ct. No. 11F02554)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Blease , Acting P. J.

P. v. Buitron CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

This case comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.*fn1 Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we affirm the judgment.

We provide the following brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.)

At around 10:30 p.m. on April 5, 2011, Officers Fetch and Magner were on patrol in a neighborhood that had been recently having incidents of gang-related shootings, gang activity and firearm arrests. While on patrol, Fetch observed defendant Jesus Buitron, Jr., driving into a parking lot and, while doing so, reach to put on his seatbelt. Fetch also saw that the front windshield of defendant's car was cracked, obscuring the driver's view. After defendant parked his car, the officers initiated a traffic stop.

Fetch talked to defendant and his two passengers for approximately 10 minutes while Magner ran a records check and backup officers arrived. Defendant was shaking and appeared extraordinarily nervous. Magner returned to defendant's car after the records check came back negative. At this point, Fetch commented that defendant and his passengers looked as if they could be gang members, asked if they knew about the recent shootings, and when they said they did not, asked defendant "if he would mind" if the officer searched the car to make sure there was no gun in there. Defendant consented to the search. Fetch then asked defendant and his passengers "if they would all mind" getting out of the car and sitting on the curb while the car was searched. This conversation lasted about a minute.

Defendant and his passengers got out of the car, consented to a pat down search and sat on the curb. Magner then searched the car and found a firearm under the driver's seat.

Defendant was charged with unlawfully carrying a concealed firearm and unlawfully carrying a loaded firearm not registered to himself. (Pen. Code, §§ 12025, subd. (b)(6), § 12031, subd. (a)(2)(F).)

After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, defendant entered a negotiated plea wherein he agreed to plead no contest to unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon within a vehicle in exchange for an agreement for no state prison at the outset. Defendant waived referral to probation and requested immediate judgment and sentence. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation with the condition defendant serve 90 days in jail via work project. Defendant was ordered to pay a $200 restitution fine, a stayed $200 parole revocation fine, a $40 court security fee and a $30 court facility fee. Defendant was also awarded three days of presentence custody credit.

Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: HULL , J. DUARTE , J.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.