State v. Robinson
410 S.C. 519
S.C.2014Background
- Police received anonymous complaints of drug sales and weapons outside Hall Street Apartments; undercover surveillance observed repeated "hand-to-hand" transactions at Apartment 122.
- Officers approached Apartment 122 at night, identified themselves, and asked for IDs; officer smelled marijuana near Petitioner and observed a gun butt in Petitioner's jacket pocket.
- Officers announced a Terry frisk; Petitioner moved away, officer lunged and seized the gun as Petitioner reached for it; a struggle followed, Petitioner fled, left his jacket behind, and was arrested after pursuit.
- Search of the discarded jacket revealed a semiautomatic pistol, 3.2g marijuana, 0.84g loose crack, and 2.97g crack in individually wrapped bags; Petitioner was indicted and convicted on multiple drug and weapons charges and resisting arrest.
- Petitioner moved to suppress evidence, arguing officers unlawfully entered the porch (curtilage) of Apartment 122; trial court denied suppression and the court of appeals affirmed.
- Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether Petitioner established a Fourth Amendment violation based on the officers' entry onto the porch.
Issues
| Issue | Robinson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers’ warrantless entry onto apartment porch violated Robinson's Fourth Amendment rights | Any unauthorized trespass onto curtilage is a per se Fourth Amendment violation under Jones/Jardines; trespass need not consider expectation of privacy | Even if trespass occurred, defendant must show his own reasonable expectation of privacy to challenge the search (Rakas burden) | Robinson failed to show a personal, reasonable expectation of privacy on the porch; suppression properly denied |
| Whether Robinson waived objection to marijuana by introducing it at trial | Objection was preserved; suppression should still apply | Robinson introduced the marijuana during cross-exam, waiving suppression claim | Court declined to decide waiver because suppression claim was disposed on expectation-of-privacy grounds |
| Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to approach/frisk on the porch (Terry) | Approach and frisk were unlawful because porch is curtilage and entry was unauthorized | Surveillance, observed hand-to-hand sales, smell of marijuana, and visible gun butt provided reasonable suspicion and justified limited intrusion | Court did not decide legality of officers’ conduct because Robinson did not prove a privacy interest; lower courts’ findings that officers had reasonable suspicion left intact |
| Burden allocation on suppression motions | Police trespass establishes violation; burden on State to justify entry | Defendant bears burden to prove he personally had a reasonable expectation of privacy | Court reaffirmed: State must justify warrantless search if challenged, but defendant must first prove he had a personal expectation of privacy to be entitled to suppression |
Key Cases Cited
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (establishes reasonable-expectation-of-privacy test)
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (Fourth Amendment rights are personal; defendant must show own expectation of privacy)
- Jones v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 945 (trespass/common-law property test can support a Fourth Amendment violation)
- Florida v. Jardines, 133 S. Ct. 1409 (front porch as curtilage; use of trespass test in curtilage search)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (police may stop and frisk based on reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (trespass not always necessary or sufficient for Fourth Amendment violation)
- Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505 (home at core of Fourth Amendment protection)