State v. Shaw
213 N.J. 398
N.J.2012Background
- Police, forming part of Operation FALCON, approach a multi-unit apartment building to arrest a fugitive; Shaw exits the building and is detained after failing to provide his name; the sole basis of the stop is Shaw being a black man and the mere act of leaving the building; parole officer later identifies Shaw from a warrant list, revealing a parole warrant and another municipal warrant; drugs are found in Shaw’s waistband after his arrest and a search; trial court suppression initially denied but later suppressed the drugs; Appellate Division affirmed suppression, and the Court granted certification to review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Shaw’s stop was an unreasonable investigatory detention | Shaw: unlawful stop; no reasonable suspicion. | State: parole warrant attenuates taint; stop permissible. | Unconstitutional investigatory detention; suppression affirmed. |
| Whether the parole warrant constituted an intervening circumstance that dissipated the taint | State: parole warrant breaks causal chain; attenuates taint. | Shaw: no independent basis to purge taint; stop was fishing expedition. | Parole warrant not sufficient to purge taint; Brown three-factor test weighs against attenuation. |
| Whether the exclusionary rule should apply to suppress the drugs | State: evidence derived from attenuated taint should be admissible. | Shaw: taint not purged; exclusionary rule applies. | Exclusionary rule applied; drugs suppressed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (U.S. 1975) (attenuation factors for taint from an unlawful stop (temporal proximity, intervening circumstances, purpose and flagrancy))
- State v. Williams, 192 N.J. 1 (N.J. 2007) (attenuation analysis applied to parole warrant and taint)
- Worlock v. State, 117 N.J. 596 (N.J. 1990) (attenuation framework for post-unlawful-arrest evidence)
- Badessa v. state, 185 N.J. 303 (N.J. 2005) (attenuation of taint in police conduct after unlawful stop or seizure)
- Chippero v. State, 164 N.J. 342 (N.J. 2000) (analysis of conduct and flagrant police misconduct in stops)
- Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (U.S. 2007) (random stop as fishing expedition; intervening circumstance context)
- Mitchell, State’s Appellate case, No official reporter provided; 2005 (Ill. App. 2005) (illustrates stop for warrant check leading to suppression)