Home -> Law Blog Directory -> State Courts Blogs -> Law Library Letter

State Courts

: Law Library Letter

Summary 2008 WY 25

By Meg

Summary of Decision issued March 6, 2008

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Sam v. State

Citation: 2008 WY 25

Docket Number: S-07-0057

Appeal from the District Court of Park County, the Honorable Dan Spangler, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Tina N. Kerin, Appellate Counsel, Wyoming State Public Defender Program.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. Armitage, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and Elizabeth C. Gagen, Chief Deputy Attorney General.

Facts/Discussion: Sam entered a plea of guilty to possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. The plea was part of a negotiated plea bargain wherein he reserved his right to challenge the constitutionality of the search of his car which uncovered the evidence that incriminated him. The district court conducted a hearing in response to Sam?s motion to suppress the fruits of that search, which the State justified on the basis that it was conducted incident to his arrest for violation of a protection order and for driving while his license was suspended. The search at issue uncovered evidence of drug crimes. The district court concluded the search was proper under governing law.
The district court conducted a hearing and took evidence concerning the search and seizure issue. The Court noted their review was disadvantaged by the district court?s very limited findings. The Court stated that the resolution of the case turned on the application of their decision in Vasquez v. State. The Court recently applied Vasquez to Pierce v. State. In that instance the Court limited their consideration to only that exception which sanctioned a search of the car for evidence which might have related to the crime for which he was arrested.
In the instant case, the record was clear that the initial stop and the initial arrest were for violations of a protection order. The Court?s review of the record convinced them that the search was reasonable under all of the circumstances. The Court stated they did not think there was a requirement that a police officer be able to recite a specific list of what sorts of evidence might be relevant in such a circumstance but some items identified were cell phones or writings of any sort that indicated Sam?s intentions with respect to the individuals protected by the protection order. The officer was aware that Sam was the subject of a protection order and that he had violated it. The record suggested that it was a ?pattern? of violating the protection order. In Vasquez, the Court said that a drunk driving stop justified the search of the car?s passenger compartment for intoxicants that could serve as evidence to support the crime. Here the Court stated it was equally apt there be a search for evidence that might serve to sustain Sam?s prosecution for violation of the protection order and/or that he might have been an imminent and serious danger to his victims, given his behavior over the preceding several days.

Holding: The district court?s order denying the motion to suppress was not erroneous. Therefore the Court affirmed Sam?s Judgment Upon Plea of Guilty and his sentence in all respects.

Affirmed.

J. Hill delivered the decision.

C. J. Voigt dissenting; J. Golden joined: The dissent stated that they did not disagree with the proposition that factors such as officer safety and the presence of evidence may justify the search of an arrested person?s vehicle. There was no showing in this case at the suppression hearing that those or similar factors existed. The Wyoming Constitution forbids the search of a car incident to the arrest of its driver unless the search is reasonable under all of the circumstances. This search, being purely a search incident to arrest without justification under all the circumstances, was unlawful.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/3c6k2c .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Full post as published by Law Library Letter on March 06, 2008 (boomark / email).