State v. Miller, 228 N.C. App. 496

Defendant Miller pled guilty to possession with intent to sell/deliver marijuana, maintaining a dwelling for marijuana, and carrying a concealed handgun.”
Officers entered Miller’s home after a burglary alarm; two bags of marijuana were found outside and a dresser drawer in a bedroom contained marijuana.
A canine unit was deployed; Jack alerted in the hallway closet, where two large trash bags with marijuana were observed.
The dresser drawer had been opened during the search, which the trial court found violated rights and led to suppression for that marijuana.
The officers continued the search for suspects; Sergeant Ennis obtained a warrant and seized the closet marijuana.
Court held the dresser-opening did not taint the hallway-marrow evidence due to exigent circumstances and remanded for issues on plain view.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether fruit of the poisonous tree excludes the closet marijuana	Miller	Miller	Exclusion not required; exigent-search scope cured fruit issue
Whether the hallway marijuana was in plain view	Miller	Jack’s sniff may have opened bag; not plainly in view	Remanded to resolve whether bag was partially opened, which would affect plain view applicability
Does canine-initiated manipulation affect plain view admissibility	Miller	Dog’s actions expose contents; may violate plain view	Remanded; court will determine if manipulation occurred and if plain view applies

State v. Cooke, 306 N.C. 132 (N.C. 1982) (exigent circumstances exception to warrantless entry)
State v. Nowell, No. 144 N.C. App. 636 (N.C. App. 2001) (totality of circumstances for exigent search)
Woods, 136 N.C. App. 386 (N.C. App. 2000) (scope of warrantless search limited to purpose)
State v. McKinney, 361 N.C. 53 (N.C. 2006) (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine limits)
State v. Graves, 135 N.C. App. 216 (N.C. App. 1999) (plain view requirements under Fourth Amendment)