PEOPLE v. ALLOCATI (1989)

Alfonso Elvao Allocati appeals from the judgment entered following his plea of guilty to possession of cocaine for sale after denial of a motion to suppress evidence.  (Health & Saf.Code, § 11351;  Pen.Code, § 1538.5.)   He contends:  “The court erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress the cocaine found in the paper bag because the evidence came into plain view as a result of the unlawful police conduct of ordering the appellant to place the bag on the ground.”

Viewing the evidence in accordance with the customary standard of appellate review (People v. Leyba (1981) 29 Cal.3d 591, 596–597, 174 Cal.Rptr. 867, 629 P.2d 961), it was established that on May 22, 1986, appellant was carrying a brown paper bag and a black purse as he approached a residence at which Glendale police officers were executing a search warrant for narcotics.   Officer Kendall Chou secured the front of the residence and asked appellant his destination as appellant approached.   When he stated he was visiting the residence, Officer Chou asked him to place the objects he was carrying on the ground.   The officer conducted a pat-down search to insure safety and asked permission to look in the bag.   Appellant picked up the purse and started to open it.   The officer feared a weapon, and grabbed the purse, looked in it and observed a large amount of currency.   Officer Chou then summoned Officer Joe Jiminez, an experienced narcotics officer, who looked into the open paper bag and saw various items related to drug sales, including a plastic bag containing 110 grams of cocaine.

Appellant's contention that the cocaine was in plain view due to unlawful police conduct is without merit.   Officer Chou acted properly in having appellant place the purse and bag on the ground while he conducted the pat-down search for officer safety.   It was not unreasonable for him to suspect a visitor to a location of illicit drug activity might be armed.  (People v. Myles (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 423, 430, 123 Cal.Rptr. 348;  cf. People v. Superior Court (1972) 7 Cal.3d 186, 204, 101 Cal.Rptr. 837, 496 P.2d 1205.)

The judgment is affirmed.

ROTH, Presiding Judge.

GATES and FUKUTO, JJ., concur.