People v. Rosas
Annotate this Case
The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's judgment and held that the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the warrantless searches of his person and vehicle because the People did not meet their burden to justify either search under the Fourth Amendment.
The court held that it is well-settled that the probation exception to the warrant requirement cannot be satisfied under these circumstances. In this case, both searches were premised upon erroneous information that defendant was on probation. Even assuming that the officers who conducted the searches reasonably concluded from this information that defendant was on probation, the court held that they had no reason to believe he was subject to search terms as a condition of that probation. Furthermore, the People offered no evidence to meet their burden of proving that the evidence was nevertheless admissible under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.