375 S.W.3d 845
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Dow was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute and unlawful use of drug paraphernalia following a jury trial.
- The stop of Dow’s rental car for speeding led to a coercive sequence of questioning and a consent-based search.
- A hardware-style hidden compartment under the spare tire concealed marijuana and cash; total marijuana weight was 98.58 grams.
- Grays, Dow’s companion, pled guilty before Dow’s trial.
- The State used a peremptory strike to remove an African-American alternate juror (M.W.), which Dow challenged under Batson.
- The trial court admitted evidence obtained from the car search, rejecting Dow’s suppression motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Batson challenge to strike of M.W. | Dow argues race-based strike invalid; pretext shown via MW’s equivocal reply. | State asserts neutral reason: MW’s demeanor and hesitation; not pretext. | Batson challenge denied; strike upheld. |
| Motion to suppress evidence from car search | Search exceeded permissible detention during traffic stop; illegal search. | Investigation fell within reasonable detention; heightened suspicion justified search. | Evidence suppressed? Denied; search admitted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bateman v. State, 318 S.W.3d 681 (Mo. banc 2010) (deference to trial court on Batson credibility)
- State v. Johnson, 284 S.W.3d 561 (Mo. banc 2009) (non-discriminatory explanations allowed unless pretext shown)
- State v. Parker, 836 S.W.2d 930 (Mo. banc) (race-neutral explanations required)
- State v. Durham, 299 S.W.3d 316 (Mo. banc 2009) (neutral reasons presumed valid absent pretext)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (three-step Batson framework)
- State v. Morrow, 968 S.W.2d 100 (Mo. banc 1998) (venireperson’s hesitation supports peremptory strike)
- State v. Hoyt, 75 S.W.3d 879 (Mo. App. 2002) (reasonable suspicion may extend stop for investigation)
- State v. Sund, 215 S.W.3d 719 (Mo. banc 2007) (routine stop is reasonable seizure)
- State v. Pesce, 325 S.W.3d 565 (Mo. App. 2010) (computer check timing and scope in suppression)
- State v. Waldrup, 331 S.W.3d 668 (Mo. banc 2011) (standard for reviewing suppression ruling)