754 S.E.2d 862
S.C.2014Background
- Robinson was convicted of armed robbery and possessing a firearm during the robbery after police found a gun in the car he drove.
- Witnesses described four armed African-American men; BOLO issued with descriptions including race, age, and clothing but not a vehicle.
- A patrol officer stopped the parked car in a dark church lot, blocked it, and learned there were four occupants matching the BOLO in proximity to the crime.
- Initial contact yielded suspicions; backup officers arrived, and occupants were detained and patted down for weapons, revealing a .22 revolver with obliterated serial number on the floorboard.
- Three additional guns were later found in the trunk after the officers observed behavior suggesting concealment, leading to arrests and searches of the vehicle.
- Robinson challenged suppression of all evidence, arguing lack of reasonable suspicion and overbroad search; the trial court admitted evidence. The appellate court affirmed, applying current Fourth Amendment standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion | Robinson argues no articulable facts supported detention | State contends facts (BOLO proximity, descriptions, behavior) justified suspicion | Reasonable suspicion found; detention sustained |
| Whether the warrantless search fell within exceptions to the warrant requirement | Robinson asserts search exceeded permissible scope | State asserts plain view, search incident to arrest, automobile, and/or inventory exceptions apply | Search upheld under applicable Fourth Amendment exceptions |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (reasonable suspicion must be based on articulable facts)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (U.S. 1981) (totality of circumstances and inferences justify suspicion)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. 1980) (seizure occurs when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave)
- State v. Culbreath, 387 S.E.2d 255 (S.C. 1990) (scope of stop may expand with evolving suspicions)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (U.S. 2009) (limits automobile search incident to arrest to specific scenarios)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (U.S. 1982) (automobile exception permits searches with probable cause)
- Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (U.S. 1969) (origin of search incident to arrest concept)
- Robbins v. California, 453 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1981) (concurring opinion discusses trunk as part of passenger compartment in some contexts)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (U.S. 2011) (clarifies application of evolving search doctrine post-Belton/Gant)
- State v. Provet, 747 S.E.2d 453 (S.C. 2013) (evidence of nervousness supports reasonable suspicion in some contexts)