State v. Schmidt, 2016 ND 187

Background

Officers served a misdemeanor bench warrant for Devin Lavallie at an apartment; Lavallie was inside and arrested after officers entered with a reasonable belief he was present.
While executing the warrant, an officer observed drug paraphernalia in plain view in Lavallie’s bedroom.
Officer then went to Schmidt’s bedroom, detained and handcuffed Schmidt, brought him to the living room, and later obtained written consent from both men to search the residence.
The State charged Schmidt with possession of drug paraphernalia and later with conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance; Schmidt moved to suppress evidence.
The trial court initially suppressed but this Court reversed on the entry authority issue in State v. Schmidt (2015 ND 134) and remanded; on remand the district court denied suppression, and Schmidt entered conditional guilty pleas reserving appeal.
On this appeal the Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed, holding the detention and consent search were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Legality of detaining Schmidt after discovery of paraphernalia	Officers lawfully froze the scene and had reasonable suspicion to detain Schmidt because paraphernalia was observed in plain view	Detention was unlawful; mere presence at scene insufficient to justify seizure, officer lacked reasonable suspicion to handcuff and remove Schmidt	Court held detention reasonable: officer observed contraband in plain view, Schmidt was a resident, and officers had articulable suspicion to temporarily detain him for officer safety and investigation
Legality of entry into Schmidt's bedroom to seize him	Entry to secure Schmidt was a minimal, safety-based intrusion and not a search for evidence	Entry into bedroom was an unlawful search/seizure of person and private area	Court held entry and seizure of Schmidt were reasonable under totality of circumstances; no evidence officer searched for contraband while securing him
Voluntariness of written consent to search	Consent was voluntary despite Schmidt being handcuffed and detained; no coercion or threats sufficient to invalidate consent	Consent coerced by detention, presence of armed officers, alleged verbal threats ("tear the place apart"), lack of Miranda warning	Court found consent voluntary on totality of circumstances (demeanor, short detention, no corroborated threats, no coercive officer conduct)
Suppression remedy for evidence found in bedroom	Evidence admissible because discovered after valid detention and voluntary consent	Evidence should be suppressed as fruit of unlawful seizure/search or coerced consent	Court denied suppression: evidence admissible because detention lawful and consent voluntary

Key Cases Cited

Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (protective-sweep limits and duration)
Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (authority to detain occupants during a search)
Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93 (categorical authority to detain occupants incident to search and use of handcuffs)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (investigative stop standard; reasonable and articulable suspicion)
State v. Schmidt, 2015 ND 134 (N.D.) (prior remand holding bench warrant justified entry to execute arrest)
State v. Torkelsen, 2006 ND 152 (presence at scene alone insufficient for reasonable suspicion)