Robert Dewayne Laurent v. State
01-16-00350-CR
| Tex. App. | Mar 16, 2017Background
- Police Officer B. Curtis observed Robert Dewayne Laurent’s car with dark window tint and saw Laurent turn into a private parking lot without signaling.
- Curtis and his partner approached; Laurent exited the vehicle and began walking away. Curtis told him to return because he was conducting a traffic stop for the tint and failure to signal.
- Laurent became combative; after reentering the car, Curtis smelled a strong odor of marijuana and observed a Crown Royal bag that he associated with concealing contraband.
- Curtis asked Laurent to step back out; he then searched the vehicle and found marijuana, methamphetamine, hydrocodone, muscle relaxers, and ecstasy.
- Trial court denied Laurent’s motion to suppress; Laurent pleaded guilty with enhancement and received a 10-year sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of initial traffic stop | Laurent: stop was pretextual and illegal; officers intended to search | State: officer observed traffic violations (excessive tint, failure to signal) providing probable cause | Stop was valid because officer observed actual traffic violations; subjective intent irrelevant |
| Legality of officer’s request that Laurent return to vehicle | Laurent: request was pretext to view interior and justify a search | State: request was for officer safety given Laurent’s combative behavior | Request was reasonable and de minimis intrusion for officer safety; trial court could credit safety justification |
| Probable cause for warrantless search of vehicle | Laurent: search lacked probable cause and was illegal | State: strong odor of marijuana provided probable cause to search the vehicle | Smell of marijuana established probable cause; warrantless search was lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- Walter v. State, 28 S.W.3d 538 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (objective reason for stop controls; pretextual motive irrelevant when violation observed)
- Garcia v. State, 827 S.W.2d 937 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (officer’s subjective reasons do not invalidate stop when objective violation occurred)
- Goodwin v. State, 799 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (officers may take measures for safety during lawful traffic stops, including ordering drivers to exit or control positioning)
- Miller v. State, 608 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (strong odor of marijuana from a car establishes probable cause to search)
- Rocha v. State, 464 S.W.3d 410 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2015) (odor of marijuana supports probable cause to search vehicle)
- Keehn v. State, 279 S.W.3d 330 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (warrantless vehicle search allowed when vehicle is mobile and probable cause exists)
- Hubert v. State, 312 S.W.3d 554 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (standard of review for suppression rulings; deference to trial court on credibility)