760 S.E.2d 814
S.C.2014Background
- Officer stops Hewins for an improper turn; Hewins is nervous and the stop becomes a detention beyond the initial purpose after a pat-down and drug-detection dog alert.
- Search of Hewins’s vehicle yielded vodka open container and two small rock-like substances; field test indicated cocaine; Hewins was arrested for possession of crack cocaine and cited for open container.
- Municipal court convicted Hewins for the open container violation in October 2009; drug evidence was destroyed based on Hewins’s mistaken conviction record.
- Hewins was indicted in 2010 for possession of crack cocaine; he moved to suppress the drug evidence arguing the search was unlawful.
- State asserted collateral estoppel: Hewins’s municipal court conviction foreclosed suppress-motion arguments; Snowdon (Ct. App. 2006) was cited as controlling in similar contexts.
- South Carolina appellate court concluded Snowdon not dispositive, rejected blanket collateral estoppel, and held Hewins could litigate suppression; the merits showed the continued detention exceeded the traffic-stop scope and the drug evidence should have been suppressed, reversing the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Snowdon controls here | Hewins | State | Snowdon not dispositive; distinguishable facts |
| Whether collateral estoppel precludes suppression challenge | Hewins did not have a valid field to bar suppression | Hewins waived via municipal conviction | Collateral estoppel not applicable to bar suppression motion |
| Whether the search was lawful and detention valid | Search occurred during unlawful extension of stop; suppressible | Reasonable suspicion justified continued detention | Detention exceeded scope; suppression warranted; drug evidence suppressed |
| Preservation and merits of suppression ruling | Merits should be reviewed on the record | Lower court ruling on suppression not preserved | Court addressed merits directly; remand not required; suppression granted |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Snowdon, 371 S.C. 331 (Ct. App. 2006) (collateral estoppel in criminal context; not dispositive here)
- Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (U.S. (1970)) (collateral estoppel in criminal context; final judgment limits relitigation)
- Gibson v. State, 334 S.C. 515 (S.C. 1999) (guilty pleas generally waive non-jurisdictional defects)
- State v. Brown, 201 S.C. 417 (S.C. 1942) (early collateral estoppel doctrine in criminal context)
- State v. Provet, 405 S.C. 101 (S.C. 2013) (reasonable suspicion standard in traffic stops; scope of detention)
- Snowdon, State Ct. App. v., 638 S.E.2d 91 (Ct. App. 2009) (discussion of collateral estoppel’s applicability in suppression context)