State v. JacksonÂ
249 N.C. App. 642
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Police conducted a knock-and-talk with an informant who admitted purchasing marijuana from Adam Robert Jackson at his residence two days earlier and described details of the transaction (physical appearance, bedroom activity, mason jar packaging).
- The informant accompanied an officer to a mailbox marked 2099 Old Mountain Road and pointed out a modular home down a forked driveway; officers confirmed the address and home type and located a CJ LEADS entry for "Adam Robert Jackson" at that address.
- Deputy Ward’s affidavit attaching Detective Jurney’s statement also noted prior citizen complaints about drug activity in the area and a December charge against Jackson for marijuana possession.
- A magistrate issued a search warrant; execution uncovered indoor grow equipment, marijuana plants, and packaged marijuana.
- Jackson pled no contest to manufacturing marijuana, reserved his right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion, and appealed; the Court of Appeals granted certiorari to reach the merits.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Jackson's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrant application supported probable cause for the search warrant | The warrant was supported by a confidential, reliable informant’s recent, first-hand, self-incriminating tip corroborated by officers (address, appearance, directions) | The informant’s tip was unreliable/insufficiently corroborated to establish probable cause; magistrate lacked a substantial basis | The warrant affidavit provided a substantial basis for the magistrate’s probable-cause finding; affirmed |
| Whether the informant’s tip should be treated as "confidential and reliable" rather than an anonymous tip | Tip was face-to-face, against the informant’s penal interest, first-hand and recent, so it carried indicia of reliability | The informant had no track record and the tip was effectively anonymous; greater corroboration was required | Court applied the confidential-and-reliable standard because of statements against penal interest, face-to-face contact, first-hand knowledge, and freshness |
| Sufficiency of police corroboration of the informant’s statements | Police corroborated key details (name/address in CJ LEADS, appearance, mailbox location, home type and location) sufficient to buttress the tip | Officers did not independently verify presence of drugs or otherwise strongly corroborate the details about where/how drugs were stored | Corroboration of identity, address, directions, and recent purchase was adequate under the totality-of-circumstances test |
| Freshness of the informant’s information | The tip described a purchase occurring two days earlier—not stale—supporting a fair probability contraband remained | The short interval did not cure other reliability defects | Two-day recency supported the informant’s reliability and the magistrate’s probable-cause determination |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (established the totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause)
- State v. Arrington, 311 N.C. 633 (North Carolina adoption of Gates and discussion of informant reliability)
- State v. Benters, 367 N.C. 660 (limits on deferring to magistrates; anonymous-tip vs. confidential-informant analysis)
- State v. Hughes, 353 N.C. 200 (when face-to-face contact and reliability indicators are lacking, anonymous-tip standard applies)
- State v. Sinapi, 359 N.C. 394 (reviewing court must ensure magistrate had a substantial basis for probable cause)
- State v. Beam, 325 N.C. 217 (statements against penal interest carry indicia of credibility)