727 S.E.2d 761
S.C. Ct. App.2012Background
- Jenkins raped the victim, who identified him near Jabbers shop.
- Police sought a DNA warrant for Jenkins’ blood and hair; affidavit described the assault but lacked source and reliability details.
- Magistrate signed the warrant based on the affidavit; police collected Jenkins’ DNA and the victim’s swabs.
- DNA analysis matched Jenkins’ profile to semen found on the victim with a very high probability of a match.
- Trial court admitted the DNA results and Jenkins was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole.
- On appeal, the court held the warrant defective and remanded to determine whether the inevitable discovery doctrine could save the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there probable cause for the DNA warrant? | Jenkins argues affidavit lacked specificity and reliability. | State contends magistrate could infer probable cause from the crime and victim. | No; affidavit did not provide substantial basis for probable cause. |
| Did the affidavit clearly indicate the DNA evidence would be relevant? | Jenkins asserts no showing of other DNA evidence for comparison. | State argues relevance can be inferred or established elsewhere. | No clear indication of relevance. |
| Was the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? | Jenkins contends DNA evidence affected the verdict. | State argues other evidence suffices for guilt. | Not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Should the inevitable discovery doctrine be considered on remand? | Jenkins seeks suppression if inevitable discovery doesn’t apply. | State asserts doctrine may allow admissibility if inevitable. | Case remanded for evidentiary hearing on inevitable discovery. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Baccus, 367 S.C. 41 (2006) (establishes standards for probable cause and affidavit specificity)
- State v. Arnold, 319 S.C. 256 (1995) (limits review to information presented to magistrate)
- State v. Smith, 301 S.C. 371 (1990) (shows need for facts linking suspect to crime and source reliability)
- Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality of the circumstances and veracity/basis of knowledge standard)
- State v. Johnson, 302 S.C. 243 (1990) (emphasizes reliability of informants and neutral magistrate responsibility)
- Sachs, 264 S.C. 541 (1975) (exclusionary rule deterrence philosophy for suppression decisions)