Legal Opinion

People v. Potter

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 19, 2005No. D044290PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HALLER, J.

Christopher Potter pleaded guilty to one count of operating a “chop shop” (Veh. Code, § 10801). On appeal, he challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress, contending the court erred in finding the search of an automobile repair shop was authorized by the warrantless administrative search provisions of section 2805. He argues the search was not authorized under section 2805 because the shop was not “open to the public” in the sense that customers were not invited onto the premises. We hold that there is no such open to the public requirement for a warrantless…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. See v. City of SeattleSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. New York v. BurgerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Donovan v. DeweySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. People v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Drakes Collision, Inc. v. Auto Club Group Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API