CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.

US Supreme Court Update - Utah v. Strieff

J.D. Lloyd - Thursday, June 23, 2016



The Salt Lake City PD received an anonymous tip regarding drug activity at a house. A detective watched the house and saw folks coming and leaving after only a short duration. To him, this evidenced drug activity going on inside. The detective observed Strieff leave the house. He followed Strieff and eventually stopped him. The detective asked for Strieff’s ID and found out that Strieff had an outstanding warrant on traffic tickets. He arrested Strieff and searched him as incident to that arrest. Of course, the detective finds meth and meth paraphernalia.


After being charged, Strieff moved to suppress the drug evidence on the grounds that the detective illegally detained him. The State conceded that the detective did not have reasonable suspicion to stop Strieff, but argued that the “existence of the warrant attenuated the connection between the unlawful stop and the discovery of contraband.” A lower court affirmed denial of the suppression motion, but the Utah Supreme Court reversed.




The Court concluded that the exclusionary rule did not require suppression of this evidence because the discovery of the warranted attenuated the connection between the unconstitutional police actions and the discovery of the drugs.


Long ago, the Court created the “exclusionary rule” to exclude unlawfully seized evidence, also referred to as “fruit of the poisonous tree.” The Court has stressed that it’s to be applied so long as its “deterrence benefits outweigh the societal costs.” There are several exceptions to this rule, one of which is called “attenuation doctrine” which provides that suppression isn’t proper when the connection between the unconstitutional action and the seized evidence is either “remote” or interrupted by some “intervening circumstance.” At question here is the latter concern: was the discovery of a valid warrant an event sufficient to break the chain between the unlawful stop and the discovery of the drugs.


The Court employs a three-part test to answer this question: (1) What is the temporal proximity between the illegal conduct and the discovery of evidence? (2) What are the intervening circumstances?   (3) What was the purpose of the conduct and how flagrant was it?


While the Court found that the short time between the constitutional violation and discovery of the evidence favored suppression, the last two facts strongly favored not applying the exclusionary rule. Under the second prong, the existence of a valid warrant was a significant intervening circumstance. Once he discovered it, he was under an obligation to arrest Strieff. With respect to the final prong, the Court didn’t believe the detective’s actions were flagrant or part of “systemic or recurrent police misconduct”: while the initial detention was “at most negligent,” his actions after the stop were “lawful.”


The dissents in this case are quite strong. Justice Kagan’s dissent states that this decision effectively invites police to make illegal stop.


My Thoughts


If you look at this case objectively, the Court’s decision makes sense: if a police officer happens to learn someone has an outstanding valid warrant for their arrest, that officer has the duty to arrest them. If an arrest is made pursuant to a lawful warrant, police may search the arrestee. Thus, the search extends from the valid warrant.


But if you look at this case subjectively, the Supreme Court has given police officers leeway to engage in unconstitutional behavior. There’s really no way around it. The Court has told officers who would rather investigate outside the boundaries of the Fourth Amendment, “Hey, we’ve got your back in the borderline cases.” Count me in Justice Kagan’s camp.



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.


Recent Posts


beylund v north dakota avondale alabama fake kidnapping, springville alabama pell city alabama § 13A-3-23 sheffield v state talladega superspeedway clarence thomas heritage christian university Marengo County Alabama cullman alabama shoplifting criminal justice mount olive alabama mccalla alabama ex parte briseno blountsville alabama moore v texas economic growth sexual assault Benn v State Sardis Alabama burglary apprendi v new jersey Tracie Todd kenneth eugene billups fraudulent checks russell calhoun baldwin county alabama cherokee county alabama church robberies hoover alabama road rage south carolina adger alabama npr edwards v arizona maryland court of special appeals mulga alabama dekalb county alabama lauderdale county alabama endangerment of a child fultondale alabama steve avery homicide Alonzo Ephraim constitutional law, Mike Hubbard madison alabama making a murderer drug trafficking, street racing Joshua Reese gun rights stanley brent chapman legende v state Tommy Arthur debtor prison benjamin todd acton morris alabama theft capital offenses alabama law enforcement agency Ingmire v State montgomery alabama habeas corpus relief Justice Sotomayor peyton pruitt baltimore city circuit court birchfield v north dakota Walker County Alabama utah v strieff asia mcclain ring v arizona capital punishment SCOTUS, trussville alabama serial ake v oklahoma fourth amendment Stephen Breyer 28 U.S.C. § 2254 drug seizure gadsden alabama criminal justice reform, forced isolation social media kimberly alabama sarah koenig st clair county alabama decatur alabama anniston alabama, debit card skimming scams marion county brendan dassey brady v maryland Malone v State attempted murder New York Times brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix terell corey mcmullin department of justice unlawful manufacturing abuse William Pryor aziz sayyed domestic abuse drug possession, Alabaster alabama birmingham alabama fort payne alabama alabama eleventh circuit ruling warrior alabama Shonda Walker, rainbow city alabama state of arizona LWOP ferguson missouri Etowah County Alabama, christmas shooting bailey v us pinson alabama capital murder hanceville alabama mountain brook alabama utah supreme court abduction lethal injection Briarwood Presbyterian Church bessemer alabama felony assaults executions jerry bohannon greene county alabama state of alabama moving violations Lucky D Arcade banville v state battles v state mike gilotti oneonta alabama Jefferson County Alabama sentencing law and policy blog summaries homicide rate blount county alabama judicial override death penalty, breaking and entering US Supreme Court Update fairfield alabama, OJ Simpson nathan woods Kareem Dacar Gaymon Hillary Clinton, self defense negligent homicide lamar county kidnapping court of criminal appeal releases assault robberies boaz alabama warrantless blood draws operation crackdown Kay Ivey CCA update 2016 election, shelby county adnan syed, florence alabama armed robbery home repair fraud department of justice, animal cruelty foley alabama Eutaw Alabama tarrant alabama mobile alabama pruitt v state § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing huntsville alabama Woods v State eric sterling strickland v washington West Alabama death penalty alabama criminal law roundup morgan county alabama calhoun county alabama implied consent illegal gun carry aiding and abetting Adamsville alabama embezzlement texas levins v state eighth amendment, hurst mandamus editorial concealed carry brookside alabama abandonment hurst v florida shooting death keith v state Dylann Roof huntsville arson domestic violence murder nicholas hawkins court systems, underage drinking drug crimes brian fredick lucas midazolam lethal injection drugs drug activity shooting Donald Trump, Samuel Alito christian guitierez Easter minor offenses albertville alabama sixth amendment Guy Terrell Junior prostitution sting campbell v state heflin alabama Rule 32 public assistance fraud dora alabama crime of passion Wesley Adam Whitworth hoax destructive devices scotus operation bullseye Xavier Beasley parole eugene lee jones v state john earle redfearn IV v state constitutional violations dothan alabama illegal gambling bernard v north dakota smith v state Thomas Hardiman stoves v state betton v state identity theft narcotics investigation car accident the mannequin challenge tuscaloosa alabama netflix mcwilliams v dunn court of criminal appeals second amendment Gardendale Alabama pelham alabama fraud Neil Gorsuch bomb threat gun control hall v florida alabama supreme court criminal mischief alfonso morris limestone county alabama OJ Simpson Made in America drug smuggling towles v state Fentanyl drug busts Glaze v State theft of property Pleasant Grove Alabama



These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |


As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.