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


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



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.