State v. Amir Randolph(076506) (Hudson County and Statewide), 159 A.3d 394

Background

Police under surveillance observed apparent hand-to-hand drug transactions involving Markees King at a three-story Jersey City building; officers arrested purchasers and later King.
Sergeant Trowbridge entered the building vestibule after a first-floor tenant admitted him, heard running upstairs, found a handgun in the common area, and then entered the second-floor apartment that appeared disordered and ajar.
Inside the second-floor unit officers found drugs, paraphernalia, currency, and mail addressed to Amir Randolph (defendant) at a different address; total recovery included numerous baggies of marijuana and glassine envelopes of heroin.
Defendant was arrested on the third floor by U.S. Marshals (who were independently executing a homicide arrest warrant) and charged with multiple possessory drug offenses; he moved to suppress evidence from the second-floor search.
The trial court denied suppression based on a finding (erroneously applying a reasonable-expectation-of-privacy test) that the apartment was vacant; the Appellate Division reversed, remanding for a suppression hearing and ordering a new trial for failure to give a "mere presence" charge.
The Supreme Court reviewed: it held defendant had automatic standing to challenge the search (State failed to prove abandonment/trespass), ordered a new suppression hearing to address exigent-circumstances/protective-sweep justifications, but found omission of a "mere presence" instruction harmless.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing to challenge search of apartment	State: defendant still must show reasonable expectation of privacy; otherwise no suppression	Randolph: automatic standing applies for possessory drug charges unless State proves abandonment/trespass	Defendant has automatic standing; State bears burden to prove abandonment/trespass; it did not do so here
Exceptions to automatic standing for real property	State: apartment was effectively vacant/abandoned, justifying no standing	Randolph: abandonment/trespass not established by record; disarray ≠ abandonment	Court recognizes three exceptions (abandonment, trespass, lawful eviction) but State must prove them; here it failed to show abandonment/trespass
Jury instruction on "mere presence" (constructive possession)	State: constructive-possession charge sufficed; no separate "mere presence" needed	Randolph: requested Model "mere presence" instruction; omission was error	Trial court should have given it but omission was harmless because constructive-possession instruction adequately conveyed that mere presence alone is insufficient
Use of evidence/charge on flight	State: flight evidence is probative; should be admissible without an "unequivocal" standard	Randolph: facts here (Marshals pursuing defendant, ambiguous running) undermine using flight as consciousness of guilt	Flight evidence may be used if it reasonably supports inference of consciousness of guilt; not required to be "unequivocal"; trial court must carefully weigh probative value vs. prejudice and tailor any flight instruction

Key Cases Cited

State v. Alston, 88 N.J. 211 (establishes New Jersey automatic standing rule based on proprietary, possessory, or participatory interest)
State v. Brown, 216 N.J. 508 (rejects "trashy house" abandonment theory; explains factors for abandonment/trespass inquiries)
State v. Hinton, 216 N.J. 211 (addresses effect of lawful eviction on expectation of privacy and standing in a unique eviction context)
State v. Johnson, 193 N.J. 528 (rejects grafting federal reasonable-expectation test onto New Jersey automatic-standing rule)
State v. Earls, 214 N.J. 564 (identifies novel privacy category—cell-phone location—requiring expectation-of-privacy analysis)
State v. Reid, 194 N.J. 386 (addresses standing for subscriber information from Internet providers)
State v. McAllister, 184 N.J. 17 (addresses expectation-of-privacy/standing for bank records)
State v. Lamb, 218 N.J. 300 (confirms continued vitality of automatic standing under New Jersey law)