State v. Ramos

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0261 · Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One · January 26, 2017 · No. No. 1 CA-CR 16-0261

Summary

The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed Ismael Ramos’s conviction for second-degree money laundering. The court held that the vehicle driver had apparent common authority to consent to a search of the vehicle, including the trunk and its contents, and that the defendant’s failure to object did not require suppression of currency found in his duffel bag.

Court
Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One
Writing for the Court
Lawrence F. Winthrop; Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe; Judge Jon W. Thompson
Jurisdiction
Arizona
Decision date
January 26, 2017
Docket number
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0261
Procedural posture
Ramos appealed his conviction for second-degree money laundering and his placement on probation, arguing for the first time on appeal that the driver lacked authority to consent to the search of Ramos's duffel bag inside the vehicle.
Standard of review
Because Ramos did not raise the suppression argument in the trial court, the court reviewed for fundamental error, requiring him to establish error, that the error was fundamental, and resulting prejudice. Ordinarily, suppression rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
Nonprecedential memorandum decision; not for official publication and citable only as authorized by Arizona Rule of the Supreme Court 111(c).
Parties
Ismael Ramos v. State of Arizona
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

search and seizurefourth amendmentsuppression of evidencecriminal procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawevidenceappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the driver had common authority to consent to a search of the vehicle's trunk and the closed containers found there, including Ramos's duffel bag.
  2. Whether the trial court committed fundamental error by failing sua sponte to preclude evidence obtained from the search of Ramos's duffel bag.

Holdings

  1. A driver with control over a vehicle and its trunk has common authority to consent to a search of the vehicle, including the trunk and its contents, when the ownership of a container is not apparent or made apparent to the officers.
  2. The trial court did not commit error, much less fundamental prejudicial error, by failing to preclude evidence obtained from the search of Ramos's duffel bag.

Key quotations

The test for determining common authority focuses on apparent rather than actual authority, such that, if it reasonably appears a third party has common authority, the consent to search is generally valid. (6)
The standard for measuring the scope of a suspect’s consent under the Fourth Amendment is that of ‘objective’ reasonableness—what would the typical reasonable person have understood by the exchange between the officer and the suspect? (6)
Thus, individual ownership of the bags in the trunk was not made apparent to Sergeant Karim, and by virtue of Donte’s consent, the sergeant was authorized to search the vehicle and all of the contents contained therein. (7)

Factual background

A sheriff's sergeant stopped a Chrysler 200 after observing unsafe following and continued driving onto the shoulder, and he smelled burnt marijuana from the vehicle. The driver, Donte Hardaway, consented to a search of the vehicle; Ramos and the other occupants were removed from the vehicle and watched the search without objecting or identifying any bags as their own. Officers found three bags of currency in the trunk, including Ramos's duffel bag containing approximately $12,000, and later discovered drug-related photographs and text messages on Ramos's phone.

Procedural history

A Mohave County grand jury indicted Ramos and two codefendants for second-degree money laundering. They were tried together and found guilty. The superior court suspended Ramos's sentence and imposed three years of probation. Ramos appealed, and the Arizona Court of Appeals reviewed the unpreserved search-and-seizure claim for fundamental error.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…