State v. Perry, 250 So. 3d 1180

At ~1:05 a.m., Officer Paz saw Tyrone Perry in a parked Nissan Titan that had struck a vehicle; Paz shone a flashlight into the truck and saw Perry reaching down.
Perry exited, became nervous, attempted to leave, was grabbed by Paz, pulled away, punched Paz, fled, and was pursued and subdued after a physical struggle with multiple officers.
During the struggle officers observed Perry discard a bag later recovered containing multiple small bags of cocaine; a K-9 then alerted to narcotics on the truck.
After Perry was handcuffed and seated in a patrol car, officers searched the truck and recovered a firearm beneath the driver’s seat; Perry was charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (La. R.S. 14:95.1), possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and battery of a police officer.
Perry proceeded pro se at trial (with appointed "shadow" counsel); the jury convicted him of firearm possession and battery, acquitted him of the drug distribution count; he received 15 years (count one) and 3 years at hard labor (count three).
On appeal the court affirmed convictions and the 15-year sentence for the firearm count, but vacated and remanded the sentence on the battery conviction because of an errors-patent discrepancy concerning denial of benefits for part of the sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Denial of motion to suppress (warrantless vehicle search)	Search valid under automobile exception and probable cause (K-9 alert, discarded narcotics, events observed)	Search violated Fourth Amendment; Gant/SIA rule inapplicable because Perry was handcuffed and secured; no exigency	Search upheld: probable cause existed (discarded narcotics, K-9 alert, struggle) so automobile exception justified warrantless search
Right to represent self (Faretta)	Court conducted thorough colloquy; defendant knowingly waived counsel	Waiver not knowing/intelligent; court failed to adequately warn of dangers and investigate mental history	Waiver valid: extensive colloquy, defendant competent and understood risks; no abuse of discretion
Challenges for cause (juror bias concerning law enforcement)	Prospective jurors capable of impartiality after voir dire	Jurors had law-enforcement connections so should be excused for cause	Denial of challenges for cause not preserved (no contemporaneous objection); even on merits, voir dire showed jurors could be impartial, so no abuse of discretion
Excessive sentence for firearm possession	Statutory range 10–20 yrs; 15 years not excessive given offense and prior record	15 years excessive	Sentence affirmed: within statute and not grossly disproportionate under circumstances

Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (U.S. 2009) (limits on searches incident to arrest of vehicles)
Pennsylvania v. Labron, 518 U.S. 938 (U.S. 1996) (automobile exception: probable cause to search a readily mobile vehicle)
Maryland v. Dyson, 527 U.S. 465 (U.S. 1999) (automobile exception has no separate exigency requirement)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (probable cause defined as fair probability)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Tatum, 466 So.2d 29 (La. 1985) (no constitutional distinction between seizing a car for magistrate review and immediate warrantless search when probable cause exists)
State v. Gant, 637 So.2d 396 (La. 1994) (drug-dog alert as basis for probable cause to search vehicle)