921 N.W.2d 706
S.D.2018Background
- Early-morning 911 call reported an unconscious female being raped inside a detached garage on Toby Rolfe’s property; caller named Rolfe as an assailant.
- Two Pennington County deputies arrived, heard voices and loud music inside, and knocked on both the garage roll-up door and a walk-through door for under two minutes while announcing the Sheriff’s Office (one deputy also used a false neighbor name to elicit a response).
- Occupants approached; through the closed walk-through door deputies identified themselves and explained they were checking on a reported assault. Marvin Payne opened the door; Rolfe stood behind him.
- Deputies asked to enter to check on any injured person; Payne said “Yeah, yeah, yeah” and Rolfe nodded; deputies entered and found an unconscious, partially nude female under an air-hockey table.
- Payne and Rolfe were arrested; a warrant search of Payne’s phone (found incident to arrest) revealed photos of the unconscious female being sexually penetrated. Rolfe was indicted for third-degree rape.
- Rolfe moved to suppress evidence, arguing the deputies’ knocking and commands amounted to an unlawful seizure before consent; the circuit court denied the motion and convicted Rolfe after a stipulated-facts bench trial. Rolfe appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Fourth Amendment seizure occurred before entry | State: No seizure; deputies’ approach was consensual and brief | Rolfe: Knocking, yelling, and identification as police for several minutes coerced occupants — seizure occurred before consent | Held: No seizure; communication difficulties and short time frame meant a reasonable person could disregard police initially; encounter remained consensual |
| Whether consent to enter the garage was voluntary | State: Payne (and Rolfe by nod) gave voluntary consent to enter | Rolfe: Any consent was tainted by prior unlawful seizure and thus invalid | Held: Consent was voluntary under totality of circumstances; gesture and words constituted consent |
| Whether evidence from the phone should be suppressed | State: Search fell under arrest/search-incident and consent exceptions | Rolfe: Evidence was fruit of unlawful seizure/invalid consent and must be suppressed | Held: Denial of suppression affirmed; evidence admissible |
| Standard of review for suppression ruling | State: Circuit court’s factual findings should stand; legal conclusions reviewed de novo | Rolfe: Same standard applies | Held: Court reviewed facts for clear error and legal conclusions de novo; applied to affirm denial of suppression |
Key Cases Cited
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (approach and questioning not a seizure if a reasonable person would feel free to leave)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Fourth Amendment seizure requires physical force or show of authority restraining liberty)
- United States v. Reeves, 524 F.3d 1161 (10th Cir.) (prolonged aggressive knocking/announcing can constitute seizure)
- United States v. Jerez, 108 F.3d 684 (7th Cir.) (knocking, shining light, and identification may cause a seizure)
- State v. Iversen, 768 N.W.2d 534 (S.D.) (seizure occurs only when officer’s show of authority restrains liberty)
- State v. Hemminger, 904 N.W.2d 746 (S.D.) (consent is an exception to the warrant requirement; voluntariness judged under totality of circumstances)