Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed Richard J. Saitta’s conviction and sentence for possession of a controlled substance. The court held that the police had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop based on the circumstances surrounding Saitta’s presence near a building under demolition. Although probable cause alone did not justify the warrantless search of Saitta’s glove, the court concluded that the search was valid because Saitta consented.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the officers had reasonable suspicion to detain Saitta for an investigatory stop.
- Whether the warrantless search of Saitta's glove violated the Fourth Amendment.
- Whether probable cause alone constitutes an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.
Holdings
- The detention was a lawful investigatory stop because the officers had reasonable suspicion, based on specific and articulable facts and the totality of the circumstances, that Saitta had committed or was committing a crime.
- The search of the glove was lawful under the consent exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement because Saitta voluntarily handed the glove to the officer after the officer asked to see it.
- Probable cause, standing alone, is not an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement for a search of a person. The district court's contrary reasoning was erroneous, but the error did not require suppression because the search was independently supported by voluntary consent.
Key quotations
“A seizure in the Fourth Amendment context occurs only if, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he or she was not free to leave.” (at 508-509)
“Warrantless searches and seizures are per se unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, subject to a few established and well-delineated exceptions.” (at 511-512)
“These facts show and the record supports that Buckley did not use coercion or duress when he asked to see the glove, and Saitta almost immediately handed the glove to Buckley without hesitation or protest, showing that his will was not overborne and that he did not merely acquiesce to duress or coercion.” (at 515)
Factual background
At approximately 5:43 a.m., Omaha police officers saw Saitta looking into the window of a building being demolished in an area known for trespassing, sleeping, and scrap-metal theft. When officers entered the alley, they saw Saitta hiding in bushes near the building and observed him place something into a glove. After an officer physically stopped Saitta from backing away, the officer asked to see the glove; Saitta promptly handed it over, and the officer found a plastic bag containing methamphetamine inside.
Procedural history
The Douglas County District Court denied Saitta's motion to suppress, finding that the police had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop and that probable cause justified the search of his glove. After Saitta waived a jury trial, the court conducted a bench trial, found him guilty of possession of a controlled substance, and sentenced him to one year of probation. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.