Legal Opinion
People v. Pearl
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 8, 2009No. G041316PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FYBEL, J.
Introduction
William Michael Pearl challenges his conviction for one count each of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459 [count 1]) and receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a) [count 2]) on the ground the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence seized during warrantless searches of his living space. The only justification ever offered by the prosecution for the warrantless searches was that Pearl was on parole and subject to a search condition when the searches were conducted.
We hold the prosecution failed to meet its burden imposed by…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Welsh v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Herring v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. CortezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Mosley v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2024
- People v. Gazzaway CA1/3California Court of Appeal · 2021
- People v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.