State v. Duffus
125 Conn. App. 17
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2010Background
- Duffus appeals after a conditional nolo contendere to possession of narcotics with intent to sell; suppression of evidence from a vehicle search denied; court held search justified by automobile exception and consent and Miranda issues not dispositive.
- Informant report alleged Duffus would retrieve a gray Lexus at Wawarme Ave Hartford with 3.5 kilos of cocaine in the trunk; police corroborated details including vehicle description and owner.
- Investigative sequence: officers surveilled, Duffus detained and patted down; Duffus denied ownership then later admitted Lexus ownership; canine alerted to trunk; search conducted.
- Duffus declined to sign a formal search consent form, but oral consent was provided before drugs were found; Miranda warnings were given after initial questioning.
- Trial court denied suppression; Duffus entered a conditional plea challenging the denial; on appeal, court affirmed denial of suppression.
- Court's findings relied on reliability and basis of knowledge of informant, corroboration by police, and the totality of circumstances supporting probable cause for warrantless search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the vehicle search was valid under the automobile exception | State: informant-provided details corroborated; probable cause supported search. | Duffus: informant details insufficient for probable cause. | Yes; probable cause supported automobile search. |
| Whether Duffus's consent was valid given alleged unlawful detention | State: consent valid; search justified by probable cause. | Duffus: detention rendered consent invalid. | Unnecessary to address due to automobile exception; search validated by probable cause. |
| Whether any evidence was inadmissible as fruit of a Miranda violation | State: Miranda violation argument not applicable to physical fruits. | Duffus: evidence tainted by Miranda violation. | Evidentiary fruits not procured through Miranda violation; still admissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 286 Conn. 427 (2008) (probable cause and automobile exception considerations; admissibility standard under constitutional review)
- State v. Smith, 257 Conn. 216 (2001) (totality of the circumstances; informant reliability and basis of knowledge)
- State v. Orellana, 89 Conn.App. 71 (2005) (informant reliability and corroboration in probable cause)
- State v. Batts, 281 Conn. 682 (2007) (informant credibility through longstanding relationship and corroboration)
- State v. Barton, 219 Conn. 529 (1991) (informant-known to police; consequences of fabrication; reliability)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause standard of review; totality of the circumstances)
- State v. Wilson, 111 Conn.App. 614 (2008) (enumerated exceptions to warrantless searches of automobiles)
- Brunetti, 279 Conn. 39 (2006) (exclusionary rule; derivative evidence (fruit of the poisonous tree))
- Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (reasonable action context; police conduct and reasonableness)