STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DEWAYNE T. EARL(14-12-3854, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-1401-15T1
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 17, 2017Background
- On May 21, 2014, state troopers surveilling 8th and Walnut in Camden from an unmarked vehicle observed multiple hand-to-hand transactions; an individual (Darnel Barnes) approached a house, gave money to Earl, and received a black plastic bag on multiple occasions.
- Arrest teams arrived; Earl allegedly saw them, ran into his home, and troopers observed him discard thirteen decks of heroin onto a living-room table; troopers seized the heroin.
- Trooper Castle obtained a search warrant, executed it, and recovered four firearms (including an assault weapon). Earl moved to suppress the evidence; an evidentiary hearing followed.
- Defense testimony included Earl denying he was outside or engaged in drug transactions; two defense witnesses gave conflicting or ambiguous accounts. The trial court credited Trooper Castle and denied suppression.
- Earl pleaded guilty conditionally to third-degree possession with intent to distribute heroin and second-degree unlawful possession of an assault firearm and appealed the denial of the suppression motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to arrest Earl | Officer with narcotics experience observed multiple hand-to-hand transactions corroborating an anonymous tip; totality of circumstances supported probable cause | No sufficient nexus linking Earl to illegal activity; officer lacked probable cause to arrest | Probable cause existed based on officer observations, experience, and corroboration of tip; suppression denied |
| Warrantless entry/exigent circumstances (hot pursuit) | Earl fled into his home and discarded contraband, creating exigency permitting warrantless entry to prevent loss of evidence and protect officers | Entry was police-created exigency and thus unlawful; no exception to warrant requirement | Exigent circumstances existed because fleeing defendant created the urgency; entry and plain-view seizure were lawful |
| Franks challenge to search-warrant affidavit | Affidavit truthfully recounted observations; no material falsehoods or reckless omissions that vitiated probable cause | Affidavit included materially false or reckless statements (based on neighbor testimony), entitling Earl to a Franks hearing | Defendant failed to make the substantial preliminary showing required by Franks; court properly declined to hold a Franks hearing |
| Trial court factual findings/credibility | Court credited the trooper’s testimony and contemporaneous observations | Defense witnesses provided conflicting/ambiguous accounts; courtroom credibility calls favored defense | Appellate review defers to trial court credibility findings; factual findings were supported by record and upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. United States Dist. Court, 407 U.S. 297 (physical entry of the home is the primary Fourth Amendment concern)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (warrantless home entries presumptively unreasonable)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (standard for challenging veracity of affidavit supporting a search warrant)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause)
- State v. Bolte, 115 N.J. 579 (hot-pursuit/exigent-circumstances principles when suspect retreats)
- State v. Hutchins, 116 N.J. 457 (limitations on police-created exigent circumstances and credibility of factual findings)