Commonwealth v. Petty
157 A.3d 953
Pa. Super. Ct.2017Background
- Narcotics Unit conducted controlled buys at 5203 C Street on June 11, 23, and 25, 2015; Darnell Faison sold drugs and was later arrested.
- Police obtained a search warrant (supported by affidavit of probable cause) after the June 23 purchase and executed it following the June 25 buy and Faison’s arrest.
- Officers used keys recovered from Faison to enter and went to a second-floor bedroom where Petty was found in bed with a female.
- Petty reached for a pair of pants on the floor when ordered to get up; officers told him to stop, then picked up and searched the pants.
- Officers recovered currency, a wallet with Petty’s ID, and a packet of narcotics from the pants; Petty was not implicated in the earlier buys and was not named in the warrant.
- Trial court granted Petty’s suppression motion finding the in-pocket search of pants (an apparent search of Petty’s person) was excessive; Commonwealth appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether police lawfully searched pants on the floor under a valid warrant | Pants were a searchable container on the premises and within the scope of a warrant to search for drugs/weapons/proceeds | Pants were effectively an extension of Petty’s person (he reached for them); in-pocket search required reasonable suspicion/probable cause which was lacking | Search of pants was authorized by the valid warrant; suppression of evidence was erroneous — reversal and remand |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (warrant scope includes containers that may conceal objects of the search)
- Commonwealth v. Reese, 549 A.2d 909 (Pa. 1988) (visitor’s unworn personal property on premises may be searched under a warrant)
- Commonwealth v. Waltson, 724 A.2d 289 (Pa. 1998) (scope of search extends to entire area where objects may be found and includes inspection of containers)
- Commonwealth v. Abdul‑Salaam, 678 A.2d 342 (Pa. 1996) (upholding search of briefcase found on premises under warrant)
- Commonwealth v. Grahame, 7 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2010) (distinguishable: rejected "guns follow drugs" theory for warrantless searches of visitor’s purse)