P. v. Mohrmann











Filed 11/22/10 P. v. Mohrmann CA6








NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS


California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANTHONY CHARLES MOHRMANN, Defendant and Appellant.

H034459 (Santa Cruz County Super. Ct. No. F17685)

Defendant Anthony Charles Mohrmann pleaded no contest to possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and was granted probation. On appeal, he challenges the denial of his suppression motion and asserts that one of the probation conditions is unconstitutionally vague. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying defendant's suppression motion because the officer had an objectively reasonable basis for seeking and temporarily seizing the rifle. We modify the probation order to delete the challenged probation condition and affirm the modified order.

I. Background
Defendant was charged by information with possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)), and it was further alleged that he had served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). He moved to suppress the evidence that had been seized as a result of a warrantless entry into his home.
Testimony at the suppression hearing established that, at about 6:15 p.m. on March 5, 2009, Santa Cruz County Deputy Sheriffs Dee Baldwin and Christopher John Hanks received a â€