Brown v. the State
330 Ga. App. 488
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- Brown was arrested for DUI after a 2:00 a.m. incident where he drove into oncoming traffic and endangered an unmarked police car.
- An officer stopped Brown, noted odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and bloodshot eyes; Brown admitted recent drinking.
- While Brown was detained in the patrol car, the officer muted incoming calls and then opened the phone’s photos app, viewing images.
- Images included nude adult and child pornography, leading to a subsequent warrant-based search that yielded more incriminating material.
- The trial court denied Brown’s motion to suppress; on interlocutory review, the appellate court reversed, finding the initial phone search unconstitutional under Riley and the exclusionary rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether warrantless cell-phone search incident to arrest violates Riley. | Brown argues warrant required; no exigent circumstances shown. | State contends Riley either not retroactive or limited; exceptions may apply. | Unconstitutional; warrant required; search invalid. |
| Whether evidence obtained from Brown’s phone warrants must be suppressed as fruit of the illegality. | Evidence tainted because derived from illegal search. | Warrants could be valid independent of initial illegality; good-faith reliance if any. | Suppressed; derivative evidence tainted by initial illegal search. |
| Whether Georgia would apply a good-faith exception or retroactivity to Riley in this context. | Exclusionary rule should deter police conduct regardless of Riley timing. | Georgia precludes Leon-like good-faith exception; pipeline considerations discussed. | Not applicable; suppression still required; Riley governs. |
| Whether Hawkins/old Georgia precedent could salvage the search despite Riley. | Hawkins allowed some search of physical container; limits apply. | May rely on Hawkins to justify scope. | Irrelevant; Riley governs; search still unconstitutional. |
Key Cases Cited
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (2014) (cell phone search requires a warrant; incident to arrest exception does not apply)
- Hawkins v. State, 290 Ga. 785 (2012) (cell phone searches must be limited; fishing expedition invalid)
- Canino v. State, 314 Ga. App. 633 (2012) (good-faith reliance in Georgia not applicable to suppress unless allowed by statute)
- Teal v. State, 282 Ga. 319 (2007) (exclusionary rule; fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine guidance)
- Clare v. State, 135 Ga. App. 281 (1975) (tainted-evidence doctrine; independent source requirement)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (2011) (good-faith exception may apply when relying on binding precedent)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith reliance on a defective warrant; limited application in Georgia context)
- Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314 (1987) (retroactivity of new rules; pipeline doctrine guidance)