CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo

AfterTheTrial.com... Because There’s Hope After the Trial

BLOG

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


Background

 

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.

 

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


Tags

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

Archive

DISCLAIMER

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.