Summary
The Utah Supreme Court considered whether the attenuation exception to the exclusionary rule applies when police conduct an unlawful detention, discover an outstanding arrest warrant, and then conduct a search incident to arrest. The court held that the attenuation doctrine is limited to situations involving an intervening voluntary act by the defendant, while cases involving parallel unlawful and lawful police activity are governed by inevitable discovery principles. The court reversed the lower court's application of the attenuation doctrine.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the attenuation exception to the exclusionary rule applies when an unlawful detention leads to the discovery of an outstanding arrest warrant and a search incident to arrest.
- Whether the evidence seized during the search incident to arrest was admissible under the inevitable-discovery exception.
Holdings
- The attenuation exception is limited to circumstances involving an intervening, independent act of the defendant's free will, such as a voluntary confession or consent to search. It does not apply when an unlawful detention is followed by the discovery of an outstanding arrest warrant and a search incident to arrest.
- The methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia seized during the search incident to Strieff's arrest were subject to suppression because the search resulted from the unlawful detention and the State's asserted attenuation exception was not viable.
Key quotations
“We conclude that the attenuation exception is limited to the general fact pattern that gave rise to its adoption in the United States Supreme Court—of a voluntary act of a defendant’s free will (as in a confession or consent to search).” (¶ 3)
“Because this case involves no independent act of a defendant’s free will and only two parallel lines of police work, we hold that the attenuation doctrine is not implicated, and thus reverse the lower court’s invocation of that doctrine in this case.” (¶ 4)
“We therefore hold that Strieff was entitled to suppression of the evidence secured in the search incident to his arrest in this case, as the attenuation doctrine advanced by the State in opposition to that motion was not a viable exception to the exclusionary rule in this case.” (¶ 54)
Factual background
Police received an anonymous tip about narcotics activity at a South Salt Lake City residence and conducted intermittent surveillance. Officer Fackrell stopped Strieff as he walked away from the residence, despite lacking reasonable articulable suspicion, requested his identification, and learned from dispatch that Strieff had a small traffic warrant. Fackrell arrested Strieff on the warrant and searched him incident to arrest, finding methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia.
Procedural history
Police detained Strieff without reasonable articulable suspicion, discovered an outstanding traffic warrant, arrested him on that warrant, and found methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia during a search incident to arrest. The district court denied suppression, concluding that the attenuation exception applied. Strieff entered a conditional guilty plea, and the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed. The Utah Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed.