Opinion ID: 1817269
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: did the court err in allowing into evidence the fruits of the search of frank, sr.'s car in california?

Text: At trial defense counsel argued the California search warrant was illegal in that it was based on information obtained from an allegedly illegal search of the car in New Braunfels, Texas. Officer Womack of New Braunfels Police Department testified Rico and Frank, Jr. were arrested at a motel in New Braunfels on a charge of theft of service from an innkeeper. The orange Mustang, having been used by the offenders in the theft of service to arrive at that motel, was impounded and inventoried according to the police department's administrative policy. This type procedure was upheld in South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364, 96 S.Ct. 3092, 49 L.Ed.2d 1000 (1976), and in Jackson v. State, 440 So.2d 307 (Miss. 1983). Therefore, we are of the opinion the New Braunfels' inventory search was legal and information obtained therefrom did not render the subsequent California search illegal. Frank, Sr. now attacks the California search on the additional ground that the affidavit in support of the warrant contains material misstatements of fact in reckless disregard of the truth. Having examined the affidavit and the testimony pertinent to it, we conclude this contention is not supported by the evidence. Our opinion is this assignment is meritless.