Legal Opinion

People v. Sandee

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided September 13, 2017No. D070732PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtIrion, J.

*297After the trial court denied a motion to suppress evidence, Megan Donna Sandee pled guilty to possession for sale of a controlled substance ( Health & Saf. Code, § 11378 ) and unauthorized possession of a controlled substance (id ., § 11377, subd. (a)). The trial court granted felony probation to the court for a period of three years.

Sandee challenges the trial court's denial of her motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the search of her cell phone.1 According to Sandee, *298although she was on probation at the time of the search and subject to a general search condition which allowed…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. United States v. KnightsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  4. In Re EstradaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Riley v. Cal. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. Guzman, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. People v. Pride, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  3. State v. LietzauCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
  4. People v. BurgosCalifornia Supreme Court · 2024
  5. People v. LyonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

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

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

Powered by the Exa API