Martin v. State
2017 Ark. App. 107
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Off-duty wildlife officer Vernon Morris saw Robert Martin's pickup and 16-foot trailer filled with scrap metal parked in an area known for illegal dumping; Martin stood by the truck with its hood up.
- Morris found Martin’s behavior odd, noted the license plate, and alerted Deputy Terry Clark to check the scene.
- Deputy Clark approached, asked questions about car trouble and the scrap metal (concerned about recent scrap-theft reports), and requested Martin’s identification; Martin retrieved ID from his truck.
- A records check revealed Martin’s extensive criminal history; when Clark exited his vehicle he saw the butt of a pistol in plain view in the truck.
- Clark asked Martin to move while he retrieved the visible pistol; during that retrieval Clark discovered two Ziploc bags of methamphetamine and another firearm, and Martin was arrested.
- Martin moved to suppress the evidence as obtained in violation of Ark. R. Crim. P. 2.2 and 3.1; the trial court denied the motion and Martin was convicted of trafficking methamphetamine and simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms; he appealed the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Martin) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer's request for ID violated Rule 2.2 | Request for ID was not tied to any investigation or specific crime, so the encounter exceeded a consensual approach | Truck and trailer were in an area used for illegal dumping and there were reports of recent scrap-theft; request for ID was a permissible, consensual inquiry under Rule 2.2 | Request for ID was justified under Rule 2.2; initial contact was consensual |
| Whether subsequent detention/search violated Rule 3.1 | After the ID request, further detention/search lacked justification; evidence should be suppressed | Plain-view pistol plus Martin’s criminal history gave reasonable, articulable suspicion to detain pursuant to Rule 3.1 and to investigate; discovery of additional contraband followed lawfully | Observation of pistol in plain view and criminal-history check supplied reasonable suspicion to detain under Rule 3.1; subsequent discovery admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Franklin v. State, 378 S.W.3d 296 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010) (standard of review for suppression rulings: de novo on totality; factual findings for clear error)
- Thompson v. State, 797 S.W.2d 450 (Ark. 1990) (describes consensual, nonseizure encounters under Rule 2.2)
- Scott v. State, 67 S.W.3d 567 (Ark. 2002) (framework distinguishing consensual encounters, investigatory detentions under Rule 3.1, and arrests requiring probable cause)