114 N.E.3d 556
Mass.2019Background
- In July 2015 a State trooper stopped defendant for speeding and tailgating at a toll plaza; officer smelled burnt and fresh marijuana in the car and on defendant, who admitted smoking earlier that day.
- Officer observed signs of impairment (red/glassy/droopy eyes, slow coordination, difficulty following simple instructions); after backup arrived defendant was arrested for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana.
- Officers impounded the Infiniti because it was stopped partially blocking a toll exit and both passengers appeared impaired; during an initial inventory search at the scene officers found marijuana and a loaded handgun in the trunk.
- At the State police barracks a canine alerted to the glove compartment; officers used the defendant’s glovebox key (taken at booking) to open it and found oxycodone and cocaine.
- Defendant moved to suppress all evidence seized from the car; motion judge denied the motion, and a jury later acquitted him of most charges but convicted him of possession of the drugs from the locked glove compartment.
- On appeal defendant argued lack of probable cause for the DUI arrest, that the vehicle search was not a lawful inventory search (and was investigatory), and that trial counsel was ineffective for conceding possession of the glovebox drugs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to arrest for operating while under influence of marijuana | Officer observed speeding/tailgating, odor of marijuana, defendant admitted smoking, and exhibited signs of impairment — arrest lawful | Evidence showed only prior consumption and speeding; odor alone does not establish impairment or probable cause | Probable cause existed based on observations (demeanor, admission, physical signs); arrest lawful |
| Validity of inventory impoundment and search | Vehicle posed traffic/public safety hazard; passengers were impaired so vehicle could not be released to them; officers followed written inventory policy | Impoundment wrongful because practical alternatives existed; inventory was pretextual because officers deployed a drug dog | Impoundment reasonable; judge’s finding that passengers were not fit to drive was upheld, but use of a drug dog raised concerns about pretext and Commonwealth failed to prove dog deployment was for noninvestigatory purpose |
| Application of automobile exception to search glove compartment | Probable cause to search vehicle for evidence of DUI (and because marijuana observed in car), so officers could search areas where evidence might be found, including locked glovebox | No probable cause to believe evidence of the DUI or gun would be in glove compartment; time to obtain warrant existed | Automobile exception authorized a prompt search of the vehicle and extended to the locked glove compartment; search timely and reasonable |
| Ineffective assistance for counsel’s concession of glovebox possession | (Commonwealth/respondent) Counsel’s concession was strategic to focus jury on weaknesses in other charges; no structural error | Trial counsel admitted defendant possessed glovebox drugs, which deprived defendant of viable defense on possession | Not ineffective on the record; concession was strategic, reasonable, and produced acquittals on more serious charges |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Melo, 472 Mass. 278 (summarizing standard for reviewing suppression hearing findings)
- Commonwealth v. Cartright, 478 Mass. 273 (probable cause inquiry focuses on probability from officer’s observations)
- Commonwealth v. Gerhardt, 477 Mass. 775 (marijuana use decriminalized but DUI for marijuana remains criminal; difficulty of detecting marijuana impairment)
- Commonwealth v. Daniel, 464 Mass. 746 (odor of marijuana without indicators of impairment insufficient for probable cause)
- Commonwealth v. Connolly, 394 Mass. 169 (statutory purpose: protect public from impaired drivers; impairment, not mere consumption, is offense)
- Commonwealth v. Oliveira, 474 Mass. 10 (requirements for valid inventory search: reasonable impoundment and adherence to written procedures; must not be pretextual)
- Commonwealth v. Alvarado, 420 Mass. 542 (using canine during an inventory may indicate investigatory purpose and defeat inventory claim)
- Commonwealth v. Eddington, 459 Mass. 102 (legitimate noninvestigatory purposes of inventories and reasonableness standard)
- Commonwealth v. Ehiabhi, 478 Mass. 154 (consideration of investigative motive when reviewing impoundment)
- Commonwealth v. Motta, 424 Mass. 117 (automobile exception: probable cause to search vehicle for evidence of crime)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 461 Mass. 44 (automobile searches for evidence of DUI permitted where probable cause exists)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (Fourth Amendment warrant requirement baseline)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (scope of vehicle search extends to places where evidence might be found)