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


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



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.