STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ASIM Q. JULESÂ (15-02-0343, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-2400-15T1
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 26, 2017Background
- At ~1:42 a.m., Officer Lay stopped Jules for a nonworking passenger-side brake light and expired registration; Lay smelled a strong odor of raw marijuana emanating from the vehicle and Jules.
- Lay asked Jules out of the car, conducted a frisk and reached into Jules’s groin area, feeling a round, hard, cylindrical object he believed to be a prescription pill bottle.
- Jules became uncooperative, was handcuffed, placed in the patrol car, and admitted smoking marijuana; no marijuana was found in the car.
- At police headquarters, with shift commander permission, officers conducted a strip search; Jules removed his underwear and revealed an orange prescription pill bottle between his legs containing eight alprazolam tablets.
- Jules was indicted for obstruction (disorderly persons) and third-degree possession of alprazolam, pleaded guilty, and appealed the denial of his motion to suppress the evidence from the strip search.
- The Appellate Division reversed suppression denial, holding the strip search unlawful under N.J.S.A. 2A:161A-1(b) because police only had probable cause to arrest for a disorderly persons marijuana offense when the statute’s protections attached, and statutory exceptions (including search-incident-to-arrest and exigency) could not be used to nullify those protections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether strip search lawful under N.J.S.A. 2A:161A-1(b) after arrest | Police had probable cause to arrest for a fourth-degree prescription-pill offense based on plain-feel of a pill bottle and totality of circumstances; thus statutory protections did not block a warrantless strip search | Police arrested Jules for a non-criminal marijuana offense, so N.J.S.A. 2A:161A-1(b) required either a warrant or a recognized exception before a strip search; none applied | Court held Jules was arrested for a disorderly persons marijuana offense when statutory protections attached; police lacked probable cause for the pill-possession crime and could not rely on search-incident-to-arrest or exigency to bypass the statute; strip search unlawful |
| Whether "plain feel" justified arrest for prescription-pill offense and supported a strip search | Plain-feel of a pill bottle made its contraband identity immediately apparent; officer experience and defendant’s evasive behavior supported probable cause | Feeling a bottle-like object and prior marijuana arrest did not make the presence of prescription contraband immediately apparent; reaction could be consistent with marijuana in a bottle | Court held plain-feel did not establish immediate apparent identity of contraband and did not supply probable cause for pill-possession arrest |
| Whether search-incident-to-arrest or exigent circumstances can satisfy N.J.S.A. 2A:161A-1(b) when arrest is for a non-criminal offense | These exceptions apply generally to warrantless searches and so justify the strip search here | The statute’s protections are triggered by arrest for non-criminal offenses; allowing search-incident-to-arrest or exigency to nullify the statute would defeat legislative protection | Court held Hayes and Evans control: search-incident-to-arrest and exigency may not be used to nullify the statute’s protections when arrest for a disorderly persons offense triggers them |
| Whether evidence must be suppressed and conviction vacated | Evidence admissible; conviction valid | Strip-search evidence should be suppressed and conviction reversed | Court reversed the denial of suppression and remanded for dismissal of conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Shannon v. State, 222 N.J. 576 (probable cause standard for arrest assessed under totality of circumstances)
- Hayes v. State, 327 N.J. Super. 373 (statute’s protections cannot be nullified by arrest-based exceptions; exigency/search-incident-to-arrest cannot circumvent strip-search statute)
- Evans v. State, 449 N.J. Super. 66 (plain-feel and strip-search statute analyzed; search-incident-to-arrest not available to satisfy N.J.S.A. 2A:161A-1(b))
- Dickerson v. Minnesota, 508 U.S. 366 (plain-feel doctrine framework)
- O'Neal v. State, 190 N.J. 601 (officer’s subjective intent immaterial to probable cause analysis)