Terence Dandre McMiller v. State
05-16-01217-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- Appellant Terence McMiller was convicted by a jury of two counts of possession of controlled substances; each conviction carried a 12-year sentence and $7,500 fine. The convictions arose from a warrantless search of a rental vehicle during a traffic stop.
- Officer Barrett Morris, a criminal interdiction officer, observed the vehicle slow markedly upon seeing his patrol car, followed it, and stopped it after the driver crossed solid white lines.
- Morris smelled a strong air freshener and later a strong odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle; he also observed a "Kush" air freshener and marijuana residue in the car during a subsequent search.
- The driver and appellant gave inconsistent accounts of their travel plans and addresses; the rental was booked in appellant’s name though the driver initially said it was her car.
- During the search officers found marijuana in the vehicle and, in the gas tank area, a small baggie of marijuana, approximately twenty 30 mg oxycodone pills, and a crystal substance later identified as methylone.
- Appellant moved to suppress evidence from the warrantless search arguing lack of probable cause and an unreasonable detention length; the trial court denied suppression and the appeals court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (McMiller) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had probable cause to search the vehicle without a warrant | Smell of marijuana (and masking air freshener), inconsistent statements, rental car indicators gave probable cause to search | Officer’s delay in mentioning marijuana, lack of smoking paraphernalia, and possible alternative motivations undermine claim of probable cause | Court held probable cause existed based on officer’s credible testimony of smelling marijuana and surrounding circumstances; search was reasonable |
| Whether the length of detention was unreasonable | Continued detention was justified to investigate marijuana smell, identify occupants, run checks, and await backup — investigation was diligently pursued | Search began ~20 minutes into stop and lasted ~10 minutes; appellant contends detention exceeded time needed to process traffic stop and was unduly prolonged | Court held detention was not unduly prolonged; officer diligently pursued investigation and had reasonable suspicion/probable cause to continue detention and search |
Key Cases Cited
- Amador v. State, 221 S.W.3d 666 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (bifurcated standard for reviewing suppression rulings)
- Wiede v. State, 214 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (vehicle search reasonableness and deference in suppression review)
- Moulden v. State, 576 S.W.2d 817 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (odor of marijuana can supply probable cause to search vehicle)
- Gutierrez v. State, 221 S.W.3d 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (definition of probable cause)
- Woodard v. State, 341 S.W.3d 404 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (burden-shifting when defendant shows warrantless search)
- Kothe v. State, 152 S.W.3d 54 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (traffic-stop duration: no longer than necessary; diligence standard)
- Davis v. State, 947 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (continued detention permissible if reasonable suspicion of separate offense)
- State v. Kelly, 204 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (view evidence in light most favorable to trial court's ruling)