PEOPLE v. JAEGERS (1969)

Defendant has filed a petition for rehearing which requires a response in this respect only: in our opinion we stated that the record showed that the stopping of the Buick automobile occurred in Vernon. Literally, that statement is true. The only record reference is to the fact that Officer Putnam was a police for the City of Vernon and that he first saw the Buick southbound at the intersection of Vernon and Alameda. Asked whether the intersection was in the City of Vernon, he replied in the affirmative. No further reference to either Vernon or Los Angeles is made.

Counsel now asks us to take judicial notice of the fact that the arrest was made in Los Angeles. Undoubtedly the matter is one of which judicial notice may be taken under section 452, subsections (g) and (h) of the Evidence Code. Both counsel and the court have done some factual research. There is no question that the arrest occurred in Los Angeles. Counsel's research tells him that the boundary between Los Angeles and Vernon runs down the center of Alameda. If this is true—and we have no reason to doubt it—even the illegal right turn started in Los Angeles, though perhaps only inches from the boundary.

We express no opinion on the legality of the stop and later arrest if these matters had been before the trial court. The trouble is that they were not, nor was the court requested to take judicial notice under section 453. That being so, section 459 does not compel us to take such notice and we decline to do so. Had the matter been aired in the trial court it is quite conceivable that the prosecutor would have been able to overcome any apparent illegality.

Anticipating counsel's reaction, we also hold that trial counsel's failure to raise the point does not come within the rule of People v. Ibarra, 60 Cal.2d 460, 34 Cal.Rptr. 863, 386 P.2d 487.

The petition for a rehearing is denied.

PER CURIAM.