This is regarding CALIFORNIA State law. (Evidence Suppression hearing law.)
PLEASE HELP ME, I THINK MY PUBLIC DEFENDER IS LYING TO ME, HE USED TO BE THE D.A. for the County.
I have been arrested and charged with possession of a bag of marijuana & with a trespassing charge of PC § 602 which states: It is illegal to drive any vehicle upon real property belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and known not to be open to the general public, without the consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the person in lawful possession.
I was driving my car in some woods one day and decided to park. It looked like it was public property. There were no "no-trespassing" signs located any where. I parked for about an hour and was approached by an officer. The officer asked what I was doing? I said I was just relaxing and wanting to be by myself. The officer said that he was arresting me because he got a call from a concerned citizen saying there was a car located on the property. I asked the officer if it was owner of the property who made the call. He said it was not the actual owner of this property who called. The officer read me my rights and suggested that I keep my mouth shut. When conducting an inventory search of the car, he found a joint of marijuana, and also charged me with that.
The only thing I am wondering about, is that I had no idea that this was private property when I entered onto it. Like mentioned earlier, there were no "no-trespassing" signs posted anywhere, no fences, no homes located nearby. It looked like public or unincorporated land. The penal code I was charged with states that it is illegal to drive any vehicle upon private property "KNOWN NOT THE BE OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC" without the consent of the owner.
(A) Does this mean, that in order to be convicted of this the prosecution must prove a "knowing-intent" to commit a trespass by entering onto forbidden land?
(B) Furthermore, the officer never attempted to contact the owner of the property to determine whether or not I was lawfully there, nor did he ever ask me if I had permission to be there. Can he simply assume that I was trespassing without ever attempting to make any reasonable inferences regarding this?
The officer said he could tow my vehicle because the vehicle was on private property and it was used to commit the crime of trespass. But vehicle code section 22653 states that in order to tow a vehicle from private property, the police must first obtain consent from the owner. (If the police never attempted to make contact with the owner, how can he arrest me for trespassing and tow my vehicle because it was allegedly used to commit that crime?) I think my public defender is trying to lie to me. He says I shouldn't have been trespassing and smoking weed, and that the cop had every right to arrest me and he isn't going to request a suppression hearing.
PLEASE HELP ME I am young and cannot afford a lawyer. Were the actions of the police lawful under these circumstances? I think the prosecution must prove a "knowing intent" to commit a trespass. Am I right? Can the evidence be suppressed? Thank you very much for any help
PLEASE HELP ME, I THINK MY PUBLIC DEFENDER IS LYING TO ME, HE USED TO BE THE D.A. for the County.
I have been arrested and charged with possession of a bag of marijuana & with a trespassing charge of PC § 602 which states: It is illegal to drive any vehicle upon real property belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and known not to be open to the general public, without the consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the person in lawful possession.
I was driving my car in some woods one day and decided to park. It looked like it was public property. There were no "no-trespassing" signs located any where. I parked for about an hour and was approached by an officer. The officer asked what I was doing? I said I was just relaxing and wanting to be by myself. The officer said that he was arresting me because he got a call from a concerned citizen saying there was a car located on the property. I asked the officer if it was owner of the property who made the call. He said it was not the actual owner of this property who called. The officer read me my rights and suggested that I keep my mouth shut. When conducting an inventory search of the car, he found a joint of marijuana, and also charged me with that.
The only thing I am wondering about, is that I had no idea that this was private property when I entered onto it. Like mentioned earlier, there were no "no-trespassing" signs posted anywhere, no fences, no homes located nearby. It looked like public or unincorporated land. The penal code I was charged with states that it is illegal to drive any vehicle upon private property "KNOWN NOT THE BE OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC" without the consent of the owner.
(A) Does this mean, that in order to be convicted of this the prosecution must prove a "knowing-intent" to commit a trespass by entering onto forbidden land?
(B) Furthermore, the officer never attempted to contact the owner of the property to determine whether or not I was lawfully there, nor did he ever ask me if I had permission to be there. Can he simply assume that I was trespassing without ever attempting to make any reasonable inferences regarding this?
The officer said he could tow my vehicle because the vehicle was on private property and it was used to commit the crime of trespass. But vehicle code section 22653 states that in order to tow a vehicle from private property, the police must first obtain consent from the owner. (If the police never attempted to make contact with the owner, how can he arrest me for trespassing and tow my vehicle because it was allegedly used to commit that crime?) I think my public defender is trying to lie to me. He says I shouldn't have been trespassing and smoking weed, and that the cop had every right to arrest me and he isn't going to request a suppression hearing.
PLEASE HELP ME I am young and cannot afford a lawyer. Were the actions of the police lawful under these circumstances? I think the prosecution must prove a "knowing intent" to commit a trespass. Am I right? Can the evidence be suppressed? Thank you very much for any help