State v. Bash, 27692

Berkeley County drug unit received an anonymous tip of drug activity at a Moncks Corner residence on Nelson Ferry Road; officers drove to the property and observed men in a grassy area behind the house.
Officers turned from a public dirt road (Shine Bash Lane) onto the property, parked about 20 feet from the men, exited, and detained them; one man allegedly threw down what appeared to be cocaine; another fled.
Sergeant Holbrook looked into Walter Bash’s pickup while detaining occupants and saw scales and cocaine; Bash was arrested and indicted for trafficking cocaine and cocaine base.
Bash moved to suppress the drugs, arguing the officers entered the home’s curtilage and conducted a warrantless search; the circuit court granted suppression.
The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed; the Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the court of appeals, reinstating the suppression order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the grassy area was within the home’s curtilage	Bash: area was backyard/curtilage and thus protected	State: disputed or unclear whether curtilage finding was made	Court: affirmed circuit court — evidence supports that grassy area was within curtilage
Whether officers conducted a search when they entered the grassy area	Bash: officers physically intruded into curtilage to search (not a knock-and-talk)	State: officers performed a knock-and-talk approach, not a search	Court: officers conducted a search because their conduct objectively and subjectively showed a purpose to search (Jardines/Jones principles)
Whether any warrant exception applied (e.g., exigent circumstances)	Bash: no probable cause or exigency before entry; no exception applies	State: argued knock-and-talk/public-approach or cited cases allowing entry when officers reasonably investigate a complaint	Court: no exception applied — officers had no probable cause or exigent circumstances prior to intrusion; Wright and Alvarez distinguished
Remedy: admissibility of evidence obtained after the intrusion	Bash: evidence should be suppressed as product of unconstitutional search	State: evidence admissible if entry lawful	Court: suppressed the drugs; reversed court of appeals and reinstated suppression order

Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (curtilage is part of the home for Fourth Amendment purposes)
United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294 (four-factor test for curtilage analysis)
Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (physical intrusion onto curtilage to conduct investigative search is a Fourth Amendment search)
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (physical intrusion on protected area to obtain information is a search)
State v. Counts, 413 S.C. 153 (knock-and-talk as non-search when approaching by public route)