State of Tennessee v. Jerome Antonio McElrath
W2015-01794-CCA-R3-CD
| Tenn. Crim. App. | May 31, 2017Background
- Officer Cummings twice observed Jerome McElrath on Union City Housing Authority property and, relying on a police-maintained "barred list" reported by dispatch, arrested him for criminal trespass on April 8 and April 27, 2015.
- Searches incident to those arrests yielded marijuana (10.1 g and 4.0 g); McElrath was indicted for felony possession of marijuana.
- The Housing Authority and police records show McElrath had been approved for removal from the barred list in April 2014 but a clerical error meant dispatch was using an outdated March 11, 2015 list that still showed him barred; he was re-added May 15, 2015.
- At the suppression hearing the State conceded that, but for the list error, McElrath would not have been arrested (i.e., probable cause for arrest was not argued below).
- The trial court granted McElrath’s motion to suppress the seized marijuana, rejecting the State’s request to apply a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule; the State appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the arrests were supported by probable cause | State did not argue probable cause at suppression hearing (conceded arrest depended on the barred-list info) | McElrath argued officer lacked probable cause because list was erroneous | Waived on appeal; court will not review probable-cause issue because it was not litigated below |
| Whether a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies when an officer relies on a police-maintained barred list | State argued officer reasonably relied on dispatch/police list and suppression should not apply under good-faith doctrines (invoking Davis/Herring) | McElrath argued exclusionary rule should bar evidence because Tennessee has not adopted the police-database good-faith exception at issue | Reversed: Tennessee Supreme Court has adopted only two narrow good-faith exceptions (Davis and Davidson); Herring-style database exception not adopted — suppression affirmed |
| Whether federal precedents (e.g., Herring) control Tennessee’s exclusionary-rule exceptions | State urged extension of Herring and other federal exceptions | McElrath urged adherence to Tennessee precedent limiting good-faith exceptions | Court declined to extend federal Herring exception; bound by Tennessee Supreme Court’s narrow holdings in Reynolds and Davidson |
Key Cases Cited
- Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (exclusionary rule origins)
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (apply exclusionary rule to states)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (good-faith exception for binding appellate precedent)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (police-database good-faith reliance at federal level)
- Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (good-faith reliance on judicial database)
- Krull v. United States, 480 U.S. 340 (good-faith reliance on statute later invalidated)
- State v. Reynolds, 504 S.W.3d 283 (Tenn. 2016) (Tennessee adopts only Davis good-faith exception narrowly)
- State v. Davidson, 509 S.W.3d 156 (Tenn. 2016) (Tennessee adopts narrow good-faith exception for certain warrant defects)