By Jeffrey Briggs
During the pre-trial hearing in Department 1, the judge granted Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson’s motion to suppress the blood extraction results taken from Maria Cardenas, but denied the second motion filed by Mr. Kartoon, on behalf of the co-defendant, Robert Domingo, to suppress other evidence on the basis of unreasonable search and seizure.
The hearing began with the arresting officer, Officer Hemdree, taking the stand. Hemdree’s testimony recounted the events of May 13, 2013, that led to the arrest of Mr. Domingo and Ms. Cardenas for possession of methamphetamine.
Officer Hemdree stated that, after he first passed the vehicle that the defendants were in, he turned back around as part of his routine patrol. When passing the backside of the vehicle, Hemdree ran the plate of the vehicle to check whether the registration was expired. By this time, the defendants had parked their car in the parking lot of a casino and were in the process of exiting the vehicle.
After confirming that the vehicle’s registration was expired, Hemdree testified that he exited his patrol car and asked Mr. Domingo and Ms. Cardenas if he could talk to them about their vehicle’s expired registration.
Both of the individuals complied with the officer’s request and handed him their ID’s. Hemdree then stated that he ran a records check on both individuals through the NCI system.
This search revealed that Cardenas was clean. Hemdree then ran a records check through Alameda County on Mr. Domingo, because he confessed to him that he had been arrested in Alameda County previously.
Hemdree stated that his dispatch reported back to him that Mr. Domingo was on searchable probation, giving him the authority to search the defendant’s vehicle. Hemdree then took the initiative, after serious protest from the Mr. Domingo, to call a warrant specialist to confirm the dispatcher’s report.
The warrant specialist also reported back to Hemdree that Mr. Domingo was, in fact, on searchable probation. With this information, Hemdree testified that he searched the vehicle and found two bags containing methamphetamine. One baggie was found near the center console and the other under the passenger’s seat. Cardenas and Domingo were consequently placed under arrest.
Mr. Hutchinson was then given the opportunity to argue for the motion to suppress the blood extraction results. Hutchinson pointed out that the burden of proof is on the People in relation to blood draw cases.
In the case of Ms. Cardenas, Officer Hemdree testified that he did not explicitly ask the defendant for her consent to take the blood test and did not observe any behavior that would lead him to believe that Cardenas was under the influence of methamphetamine.
With no reason or consent to the administration of the blood test, the judge ruled in favor of the defense and granted the motion to suppress the blood test results.
Mr. Kartoon was then given the opportunity to make his case for an unreasonable search and seizure of Mr. Domingo’s vehicle. Mr. Kartoon made his case on the basis that the defendant was not on any formal probation at the time. However, as Officer Hemdree stated earlier in his testimony, a judge has the power to grant informal court probation.
While the defendant was not on formal probation, he was on informal searchable probation. Therefore, the judge denied the defense’s motion to suppress the evidence on the basis of unreasonable search and seizure.
The three-day jury trial is set for January 13, 2014.
