State v. Walker

295 Ga. 888 (2014) · Supreme Court of Georgia · October 20, 2014 · No. S13G1793

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that a police officer’s command to Ernest Walker to remove his hands from his pockets did not constitute a Fourth Amendment seizure because Walker did not submit to the officer’s show of authority. The court concluded that Walker abandoned cocaine and related drug paraphernalia before being physically apprehended, so the evidence was not obtained as the fruit of an unlawful seizure, and it reversed the Court of Appeals.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Hines, Presiding Justice; Benham, Justice
Jurisdiction
Georgia
Decision date
October 20, 2014
Docket number
S13G1793
Procedural posture
The Supreme Court of Georgia granted the State's writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' reversal of the trial court's denial of Walker's motion to suppress cocaine and drug-related items discarded while he fled from a police officer.
Standard of review
On review of a suppression ruling, the trial court's findings on disputed facts are upheld unless clearly erroneous, while its application of law to undisputed facts is reviewed de novo.
Precedential value
Published, binding decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia; partially overrules contrary Georgia precedent.
Parties
The State v. Ernest Walker, Sr.
Disposition
reversed

Topics

fourth amendmentsearch and seizuresuppression of evidencecriminal procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

Criminal lawCriminal procedureFourth AmendmentEvidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Walker was seized under the Fourth Amendment when the officer directed him to remove his hands from his pockets but Walker did not comply and instead fled.
  2. Whether the cocaine and pipe were abandoned before any Fourth Amendment seizure and therefore were not fruits of an unlawful detention.
  3. Whether Georgia decisions could be read to hold that an officer's uncomplied-with command alone constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure.

Holdings

  1. A police officer's command, without physical force or the suspect's submission to the assertion of authority, does not by itself constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Because Walker did not comply with the command to remove his hands from his pockets and instead fled, no seizure occurred at that time.
  2. The cocaine and pipe were abandoned before Walker was seized, so their discovery was not the fruit of a Fourth Amendment seizure and the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress.
  3. To the extent Sams v. State or any other Georgia appellate decision can be read to hold that an officer's uncomplied-with command alone constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure without regard to Hodari D., those decisions are overruled.

Key quotations

a command from a law enforcement officer, alone, is not sufficient to constitute a seizure for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. (891)
there is no seizure without actual submission (892)
to the extent that Sams, or any other decision of the appellate Courts of this State, can be read as standing for the proposition that an officer’s uncomplied-with command alone constitutes a seizure without regard to the holding of Hodari D., those cases are hereby overruled. (895)

Factual background

At approximately 12:12 a.m., Officer David Adriance was patrolling near an elementary school after being advised to look for a black male in dark clothing suspected of attempting to steal a motorcycle. He encountered Walker, who was wearing a hooded sweatshirt and light-colored pants, and directed him to remove his hands from his pockets. Walker did not comply, became verbally combative, ran through backyards, and discarded crack cocaine and a crack pipe before the officer physically apprehended him.

Procedural history

After a jury convicted Walker of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and obstruction of a law enforcement officer, Walker challenged the denial of his pretrial motion to suppress. The Court of Appeals reversed the convictions, concluding that the officer's command that Walker remove his hands from his pockets created an investigatory detention unsupported by articulable suspicion. The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the Court of Appeals.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…