P. v. Shankles
Filed 8/13/10 P. v. Shankles CA1/5
>NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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
FIRST
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
ARMANI ANTHONY SHANKLES,
Defendant and Appellant.
A125717
( >Contra > Costa >County >
Super. Ct. No. 05-090142-1)
Pursuant
to a negotiated disposition, defendant Armani Anthony Shankles (appellant) pled
no contest to second degree robbery
(Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c))[1]
and grand theft (§ 487, subd. (c)) of Joslyn Savage and Manuel Rios.[2] He contends the court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence
(§ 1538.5). We reject the
contention and affirm.
BACKGROUND[3]
At
approximately 9:29 p.m. on January 13, 2009,[4]
Antioch Police Officer Friesen was dispatched to a robbery call on C
Street. At
the scene, robbery victim Rios told Friesen he was walking down an alley
between C and D Streets when he heard people come up behind him. Rios was struck in the head and pushed to the
ground, and his wallet and cell phone were removed from his pockets. The robbers then walked eastbound in the
alley toward C Street. Friesen dispatched an alert to other officers
of four suspects heading eastbound toward C Street. After Rios gave Friesen more information,
Friesen updated the dispatch information to include that the suspects were approximately
18 to 20 years old and were possibly African-American males wearing dark
clothing.
At
about 9:41 p.m., Antioch Police
Officer Dee learned from fellow Officer Owens that victim Savage had just been
robbed at gunpoint near West 18th and L Streets. Savage said she was walking on L
Street when she was approached by five suspects in
a maroon vehicle. Four of the suspects
jumped out of the vehicle and surrounded her.
One had a gun and the other three demanded money from her. After one suspect grabbed Savage's phone from
her hand, three suspects ran back to the vehicle. One remained and continued to demand money
from her. Savage told the suspect she
did not have any more items or money to give him; he then got into the vehicle
and it drove off. Savage described the
suspect with the gun as a Black male wearing a zipped Batman hoodie. The suspect who took the cell phone from
Savage was a Black male wearing a black hoodie with a design on the back. The suspect who just stood there during the
robbery was a Black male. The fourth
suspect, who demanded more property or money from Savage, was a Black male
wearing a distinctive bright white and yellow shirt and pants with a design on
the back. She described the vehicle's
driver as a Black male who remained inside the vehicle. She also described the ages, heights, and
weight of the four suspects who got out of the vehicle. Dee put out a police
bulletin that five Black males in a maroon vehicle may have committed the
robbery.
Antioch
Police Officer Augusta received a dispatch at about 9:44 p.m. regarding the
Rios robbery that had just occurred in an alleyway one-quarter to one-half mile
away, and that there were three Black males wearing dark clothing last seen
running on C Street toward West 18th Street.[5] As Augusta
turned his patrol car onto a road that parallels G
Street from West 20th
Street, he saw a Black male walking on the
sidewalk in the opposite direction. The
man motioned to two other Black males who were running across G
Street from the area around Antioch
High School. Augusta
said he had responded to fights, disturbances, drug use, and a shooting in that
area and described the area as â€
| Description | Pursuant to a negotiated disposition, defendant Armani Anthony Shankles (appellant) pled no contest to second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)) and grand theft (§ 487, subd. (c)) of Joslyn Savage and Manuel Rios.[2] He contends the court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence (§ 1538.5). Court reject the contention and affirm. |
| Rating |


