What authority does appellant rely on to quash and traverse a search warrant?

All of the authority appellant cites presupposes that the proceedings are held prior to trial. There is no indication that prior to trial appellant filed a motion to quash and traverse the warrant and supporting affidavit, nor that he requested in camera review of the sealed portion of the affidavit and sought to suppress evidence discovered in the search. If appellant failed to raise the issue under section 1538.5 in a pretrial forum, he forfeited his right to thereafter challenge the validity of the search and seizure. ( 1538.5, subd. (m); People v. Enos (1973) 34 Cal.App.3d 25, 40.) In this case, no issue regarding the search warrant was raised on direct appeal in case No. B144790. Even if we were to assume appellant made these motions before trial, his failure to raise any issues on appeal regarding them indicates he did not believe the trial court erred in denying any such motion. Therefore, appellant's current motions to quash and traverse the search warrant in his case are untimely, and the court below neither erred nor abused its discretion.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The order under review is affirmed.

Page 5