my name is elizabeth body i represent container or bag or not i don't like opens and closes as part of its normal function instead he found the drugs after prying apart built and seemingly sealed structural component of the car in area that is not intended are expected to be opened in an area that is not easily routinely opened or accessed and their point area that has a heightened expectation of privacy and consent cases the scope of the search is never limitless always routinely opens and closes say for example the middle consul or an ashtray but it typical reasonable person would not expect that by giving consent to search he was authorizing officers to pry apart and precluding that possibly that someone discarded the bag if you recall the police are watching the whole thing however the passenger the fuel passenger by the time the car stopped she was outside the car and walking toward the house no one ever said i was for the entire time and i never saw her take this quarter of a bag touching it or opening it there was none of that but the only auto exception the player though well this gets to the states aren't that six going to get up here in our state for the st time on appeal that probably cause for the drugs and no blow up this give the police even the officer said i stopped the car for investigatory purposes to investigate the identity of the hunters as he didn't know anything about them and investigate what a crime had occurred without more really witnessing a suspected or even known drug dealer give what looked like a white plastic bag that could have contained a myriad innocuous imo this place of pig was being transferred in a very furtive fashion a very specific deliberate bird of fashion with the cars head to head drivers doors trying to hide what was going on by it was i think that this is it was long from the purchase a few times on him before it was an ongoing investigation but all they have is a suspected or known drug dealer give something to an unknown person certainly drug dealers not everything they touch is drugs drug dealer and gave what looked like a white plastic bag to someone and if that comes to his other you know very peculiar way i don't think merely parking even a one car chases forward and the other one reverses into the parking spot i don't think that  and then the police see what looks like a white bag from a suspected drug dealer passing hands and then they see it going to the bag see when they search the car it's not the francey it's not the back seat use right but still all they have is a drug dealer it's something to someone they don't know anything about certainly drug dealers can get things to people that are in drugs certainly drug dealers can possess things that are but the wetherspoon's actions they were indicating something to do with your mo they weren't indicating that drugs were in the armor and that they could tell knew there was an armrest they were told there was a secret compartment i'm not an arm of the secret compartment car they were told that the defendant package drugs in a brown paper bag they saw the defendant put the proper bag in the back area of the car where the car was and come up empty handed they buying a package of cocaine from a man who was under surveillance by multi unit narcotics investigation a man named her beyond that they had bought the cocaine from multiple times before they were scheduled to buy more  from him that night when he drove home ballpark in my heart this car and didn't get out of the car to find it was in that parked next to him but parked in a reverse manner so the driver side of each car was next to each other exchange and then they went after the person who got the money and they ended up searching his pocket and what the court said was well you didn't have enough there to justify the search and the difference here is that know you have not only their investigation of her being and not just the fact that he was a suspected drug dealer that the statement has this is a known cocaine you this is not suspect they've bought cocaine from him multiple times they were scheduled to buy or that night and they infected by that night that's actually in the record but more than that you also then have the totality of the circumstances of where this handoff took place how it took place there your honour's mention that it was at the mall nobody went the mall nobody got out of their car they drove off in different directions but how they parked was out about it the conclusions the state can can draw from the way this exchange took place are three things one that's clear that it was prearranged otherwise they would have had to spend some amount of time looking for each other they wouldn't have known how to park in this high fashion they had to set it up beforehand to know what they wanted to do and how they wanted to do it to meet at the exact place to park in the exact way and then to conduct this handoff and then immediately leak there was no my cars over here i'll come by you sort of thing and then what common sense people's common experiences this is not a common way for people to exchange something between is not something that happens fairly often that's the conclusion the state was trying to draw the other thing that you can see from the hoffa cers observations that it was purposely obscure they opened the driver's door and then exchanged we found out later from the defendant statement twenty thousand dollars the officer than see that because the driver's door was open because it was purposely obscured so those circumstances knowing urbino was a drug dealer knowing the way this exchange took place that give the officers probable cause not just and the case to say you only need a fair probability that contraband is in the car so once you have contraband car then you can search anywhere the contraband might be and that hidden part and of course the somewhere that would fit the contraband and so just like the glove compartment you could look in the glove compartment if there's a hidden compartment and you find it you can look in there because they did true but then they were there but they were yes and then you get into the fact that while they were told they will happen how they were told they were told what so what happened when you look at what happened with the exchange the officer was inside the car searching the car and the other officer was outside the car statement later said actually that's my car i bought but on the site they're on tonight ownership and they asked the driver will can we search the car and he said go ahead and search it's not as so they say they search the up with looking at that armrest obviously when he looked at the armrest he didn't see a white bag on top of it so what else could the logic what other watchable conclusion could this officer draw but to look inside and the th amendment it's important to remember it does not require officers to be naive they are allowed to bring their experience with and these are experienced drug officers and they realize after doing this for many years that hey when somebody says there's something  that this court can affirm for any reason and if you look at the cases that the defendant has cited power away is distinguishable because that wasn't the prevailing party case so the different rules apply as to what you can argue are peel but if you look at the remaining amendment and the court said that that wasn't waived because it wasn't consistent and allowed that argument so the state the state maintains that we have not weighed this argument we can make a probable cause argument and under the totality  circumstances that there was in fact probable cause here but i got your right the state to still arguing as well in the alternative that the circuit court found there was reasonable suspicion that a drug transaction occurred and that's important the court didn't find that they properly pulled this person over for whatever traffic infractions the officer testified to the off the court found that the the facts of the officers justified the terry stop based on the drug transaction  exactly but you know again the driver of the car the officers these people are retired are required to be legal technicians they're not drawing up a contract it's a practical consideration and u rest never just recording artist ok but this all happened in a very short period of time so for example there wasn't time to hide the contraband in the wheel well or under the tire in the trunk or go out of the car and hide in some of skewer place them running panel or something along but well yeah but the car if it were if the this recently experienced officer believe that there were drugs in this car had to be inside the car or someplace and he didn't want the seats he started with the most likely places st the armrests because they were within easy reach of the person who was behind the driver the passenger who was behind the driver to whom he believed the white big he'd within easy reach and easy concealment by the passenger who was behind the driver there aren't that many places in the car that you can do that with that aren't traps and don't require a lot of tools there's no indication that there were any tools in the back seat of the car so it had to be someplace it was pretty easy to get and as i said before the police do not have any information that this white bag contains drugs it was a white bag and given the fact that the passenger was outside of the car and walking toward the house she did have the opportunity to dispose of that bag before the police stop the car and search well though she didn't leave the scene though did she she was brought back to the scene right so would have been fairly easy to under your theory looking to see suspicion but the th amendment requires more than that the police near probably cause and without more information like information that the drug dealer packages drugs in a white person or if may sell your schedule to sell drugs at that