State v. Daniel Jesus Cora, 170 N.H. 186

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire held that the State Constitution does not incorporate the federal automobile exception in its broad form. However, it recognized a limited automobile exception allowing warrantless entry into a vehicle lawfully stopped in transit when police have probable cause to believe that a plainly visible item is contraband. Applying that exception, the court reversed the suppression order and remanded the case.

Holdings

1. State v. Goss abrogated, at least in part, Sterndale's rejection of the reduced-expectation-of-privacy rationale for automobile searches, but did not require adoption of the federal automobile exception.
2. Police need not obtain a warrant to enter an automobile when the vehicle has been stopped in transit pursuant to a lawful stop and police have probable cause to believe that a plainly visible item in the vehicle is contraband.
3. The warrantless entry was lawful because the vehicle was stopped in transit pursuant to a lawful traffic stop and police had probable cause to believe that plainly visible items were contraband.
4. Under these circumstances, the Federal Constitution affords Cora no greater protection than the New Hampshire Constitution, so the entry was constitutional under both constitutions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether New Hampshire should adopt the federal automobile exception permitting a warrantless search of every part of a lawfully stopped vehicle where police have probable cause to search.
2. Whether New Hampshire should recognize a narrower automobile exception permitting police to enter a lawfully stopped vehicle in transit when they have probable cause to believe that a plainly visible item is contraband.
3. Whether the warrantless entry into Cora's vehicle was lawful under Part I, Article 19 of the New Hampshire Constitution and the Federal Constitution.
4. Whether the police entry was constitutional under a trespass theory.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded