State v. Counts
413 S.C. 153
| S.C. | 2015Background
- Counts was convicted of possession with intent to distribute marijuana, third offense.
- Counts moved to suppress drugs and weapon found at his home after he opened his door in response to a knock on the residence.
- Police used a “knock and talk” investigative technique without a warrant or stated probable cause.
- Anonymous tips (2007 and 2008) prompted surveillance and investigative steps, including two attempted controlled buys.
- Officers identified Counts via tips and prior records, approached his residence, and upon Count’s opening the door observed odor of marijuana and a gun, leading to a protective sweep and later a search warrant revealing additional contraband.
- Court denied suppression at trial; Court of Appeals affirmed; this Court granted certiorari and affirmed as modified to address state privacy concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether knock and talk violates Fourth Amendment, SC Const. privacy, or both. | Counts argues knock and talk evades warrant requirements. | Counts asserts warrantless approach with insufficient suspicion invades privacy. | Knock and talk valid under Fourth Amendment and state privacy law to extent reasonable suspicion existed. |
| Whether heightened privacy under Article I, § 10 requires a threshold evidentiary basis before a knock and talk. | Counts contends SC privacy provision requires stricter safeguards. | Counts asserts state privacy should bar the approach without suspicion. | SC privacy requires reasonable suspicion before approaching residence for knock and talk. |
| Whether the evidence found during the knock and talk, protective sweep, and plain view was properly admitted. | Counts contends evidence tainted by unlawful entry. | State asserts exigent circumstances and plain view justify admission. | Evidence properly admitted; exigent circumstances plus plain view supported warrant. |
Key Cases Cited
- Florida v. Jardines, 133 S. Ct. 1409 (2013) (front-door knock as permissible without warrant; invitation to enter)
- United States v. Cephas, 254 F.3d 488 (4th Cir. 2001) (knock and talk generally non-search; no probable cause needed to verbal inquiry)
- State v. Wright, 391 S.C. 436 (2011) (SC Court recognizes uncertain boundaries of knock and talk at home)
- State v. Forrester, 343 S.C. 637 (2001) (SC privacy higher protection; consent scope limits revealed)
- State v. Weaver, 374 S.C. 313 (2007) (SC privacy interest in warrantless searches; vehicle context nuance)
- State v. Bash, 412 S.C. 420 (Ct. App. 2015) (Fourth Amendment knock and talk; privacy considerations)