State v. Allman, 369 N.C. 292

Background

Police stopped a car driven by Jeremy Black with Sean Whitehead as passenger and found 8.1 ounces of marijuana (packaged for sale) and >$1,600 in cash.
Whitehead told officers he and Black lived at 30 Twin Oaks Drive; their mother, Elsie Black, told detectives they actually lived at 4844 Acres Drive (affidavit mistakenly listed 4814).
Mother’s description of the Acres Drive house and two trucks matched the property; one truck was registered to Black.
Detective Bacon’s affidavit recited his training/experience that drug dealers often keep drugs, records, scales, packaging, and cash at their homes. Bacon included the traffic stop, K-9 alert, criminal histories of Whitehead and Black, mother’s statements, and the matching property description.
A magistrate issued a search warrant for the Acres Drive residence; police found marijuana throughout the living room, drug paraphernalia, a shotgun in defendant Allman’s bedroom, and psilocybin in a safe.
The trial court granted Allman’s motion to suppress; the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court reviewed whether the affidavit supported a finding of probable cause.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Allman's Argument	Held
Whether the affidavit provided probable cause to search Allman’s home	Affidavit established probable cause under totality: K-9 alert and large, packaged marijuana + cash indicated dealing; suspects lied about residence; mother’s identification and truck registration linked suspects to the house; training/experience supported inference that evidence would be at home	Affidavit was conclusory and failed to particularly link evidence of drug dealing to Allman’s residence; statutory particularity requirement not satisfied	Reversed Court of Appeals: magistrate had a substantial basis for probable cause under totality of the circumstances
Whether a suspect’s lie about address can help link crime to residence	Lies combined with other indicia of dealing reasonably infer evidence at the residence	Lie alone insufficient to support probable cause	A lie, when combined with other evidence of dealing and corroborating facts, can support probable cause
Whether N.C.G.S. § 15A-244(3) imposes a stricter particularity/probable cause standard than federal law	Statute requires an affidavit stating facts and circumstances with particularity but does not change the probable cause standard	Statute was argued to provide independent, stricter basis to suppress	Court: § 15A-244(3) governs affidavit form/particularity but does not alter the substantive probable cause standard
Whether Campbell compels suppression here	State: Campbell is distinguishable because this affidavit included affiant’s training/experience and a suspect’s lie about address corroborated by third-party statements and vehicle registration	Allman: facts materially indistinguishable from Campbell, so affidavit is too conclusory	Court: Distinguished Campbell; presence of training/experience recitals and address-lie plus corroboration provided sufficient basis for magistrate

Key Cases Cited

Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances probable cause test)
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (warrant requirement for home searches absent exigency)
Massachusetts v. Upton, 466 U.S. 727 (magistrate may draw reasonable inferences; avoid hypertechnical review)
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule; discussed in note)
State v. Arrington, 311 N.C. 633 (state adoption of Gates totality test and standard of review)
State v. Campbell, 282 N.C. 125 (suppressing search where affidavit was conclusory)
State v. Riggs, 328 N.C. 213 (magistrate may draw reasonable inferences; deferential review)
State v. Bright, 301 N.C. 243 (affidavit must provide reasonable cause to believe sought items will be on premises)
United States v. Whitner, 219 F.3d 289 (suspect’s lie about address can be important evidence linking crime to location)
United States v. Caicedo, 85 F.3d 1184 (lie about address supported finding of probable cause with other evidence)