State v. Burdick
2014 UT App 34
| Utah Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Riverdale detectives entered an Ogden residence with consent from a resident to look for a suspect; they encountered Defendant Burdick and two others, with drugs and weapons visible in the living room.
- Detective Warren observed furtive movements by Burdick, found a knife under his leg, asked for consent to search for weapons; Burdick consented after initially refusing.
- During a pat-down, Warren felt and identified an object he testified was a syringe in Burdick’s right pocket, removed it, and then arrested Burdick for possession of drug paraphernalia.
- While seated and handcuffed, Burdick continued furtive movements; Warren then discovered a pink bag of methamphetamine on the floor near where Burdick had been sitting.
- Burdick was tried and convicted of possession of a controlled substance in a drug-free zone, possession of drug paraphernalia, and interference with an arresting officer. He appealed (suppression ruling and ineffective assistance claims).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Burdick) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Validity/scope of weapons search (pat-down) | Patrol frisk/consensual weapons search lawful; officer felt syringe during permissible pat-down | Pat-down exceeded Terry; officer manipulated pocket and discovered syringe beyond permissible scope | Search lawful: court concluded Burdick consented and the pat-down did not exceed Terry; felt object’s contour made its identity reasonably apparent |
| 2. Syringe as a weapon | Syringe may be used as a weapon; officer reasonably removed it for safety | Syringe is commonly for medical use and does not meet statutory "dangerous weapon" definition; not per se a weapon | Majority: affirmed trial court that a syringe can be used as a weapon for frisk purposes (concurring judge dissented on this point) |
| 3. Probable cause to arrest for paraphernalia | Officer had probable cause after discovering syringe | Syringe may be legitimate medical device; arrest lacked probable cause | Not reviewed on appeal: claim not preserved before trial court, so court declined to consider it |
| 4. Ineffective assistance for not raising pro se jurisdictional dismissal & not moving directed verdict | Counsel’s decisions reasonable; directed verdict would have been futile; jurisdictional challenge unsupported by record | Counsel should have pursued pro se motion alleging detectives lacked jurisdiction and should have moved for directed verdict on insufficient evidence of constructive possession | Court held counsel not ineffective: record didn’t show jurisdictional deficiency and there was "some evidence" tying Burdick to the meth (syringe, furtive movements, proximity, statements), so a directed verdict motion would have been futile |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes permissible scope of a protective frisk for officer safety)
- Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993) ("plain feel" doctrine limits manipulation during a frisk; identifiable contraband may be seized)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
- United States v. Harris, 313 F.3d 1228 (10th Cir. 2002) (officer need only have reasonable belief an item might be a weapon to investigate further)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963) (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine)