Title: Brunson v. State

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

Alton Levern BRUNSON v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 96-826                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                Opinion delivered March 17, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- petition for review following decision by court of
     appeals -- case reviewed as if originally filed in supreme court. --
     After granting a petition for review following a decision by
     the court of appeals, the supreme court reviews the case as
     though the appeal was originally filed with it.

2.   Motions -- denial of motion to suppress evidence -- factors on review. --
     In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence, the
     appellate court makes an independent examination based upon
     the totality of the circumstances and reverses only if the
     decision is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence;
     the court views the facts in the light most favorable to the
     State.

3.   Search & seizure -- determination of probable cause -- standard same for
     search and arrest. -- The same standards govern reasonable- or
     probable-cause determinations, regardless of whether the
     question is the validity of an arrest or the validity of a
     search and seizure; the determination of probable cause is to
     be based on the factual and practical considerations of
     everyday life upon which reasonable and prudent persons act;
     in assessing the existence of probable cause, the appellate
     court's review is liberal rather than strict.

4.   Arrest -- warrantless arrest -- when officer may make. -- With
     reasonable cause to believe that an offense has been or is
     being committed in the officer's presence, an officer may make
     an arrest without a warrant pursuant to A.R.Cr.P. Rule
     4.1(a)(iii).

5.   Arrest -- smell of marijuana or its smoke gives rise to reasonable
     suspicion to arrest occupants of vehicle. -- The smell of marijuana
     or its smoke emanating from a vehicle gives rise to reasonable
     suspicion to detain the occupants to determine the lawfulness
     of their conduct, to search the vehicle, and to arrest some or
     all of its occupants, depending upon the particular
     circumstances.

6.   Arrest -- smell of marijuana provided reasonable cause to arrest occupants
     of vehicle in which appellant was passenger. -- The supreme court
     concluded that the smell of the marijuana or its smoke
     emanating from a vehicle that had been stopped for violation
     of a noise ordinance gave the detective reasonable cause to
     believe that an offense had been or was currently being
     committed inside the enclosed space of the vehicle; he thus
     had probable cause to arrest the occupants of the vehicle,
     including appellant, consistent with A.R.Cr.P. Rule
     4.1(a)(iii).

7.   Search & seizure -- search and arrest were substantially contemporaneous. -
     - Once an officer has made a lawful arrest, he may, without a
     warrant, search the person to obtain evidence of the
     commission of the offense or to seize contraband pursuant to
     A.R.Cr.P. Rule 12.1(d); a search is valid as incident to a
     lawful arrest even if it is conducted before the arrest,
     provided that the arrest and search are substantially
     contemporaneous and that there was probable cause to arrest
     prior to the search; here, the smell of marijuana or its smoke
     emanating from the vehicle constituted probable cause to
     arrest the occupants, and, according to the detective's
     testimony, the smell existed prior to the search; the search
     and the arrest were substantially contemporaneous, the
     detective having testified that he conducted a pat-down search
     of appellant, found the marijuana, arrested appellant, and
     then continued to search him following the arrest.

8.   Search & seizure -- warrantless search of appellant was reasonable. --
     Under the totality of the circumstances, the supreme court
     concluded that the warrantless search of appellant's person
     was reasonable; accordingly, it could not conclude that the
     trial court erred in denying appellant's motion to suppress;
     in reaching this conclusion, the court balanced the public
     interest of officer safety against appellant's right to
     personal security free from arbitrary interference by law
     officers.

9.   Search & seizure -- pat-down search was not arbitrary interference with
     appellant's personal-security interest. -- Weighing appellant's
     personal interest, the supreme court determined that where the
     search in question was a pat-down search conducted
     contemporaneously with an arrest based on probable cause, it
     was not an arbitrary interference with appellant's personal-
     security interest.

10.  Search & seizure -- balance weighed in favor of public interest -- search
     of appellant's person was reasonable. -- Because the danger to an
     officer during a traffic stop is likely to be greater when
     there are passengers in addition to the driver of the stopped
     car, an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to
     get out of the car pending the completion of the stop; the
     supreme court, weighing the public interest in officer safety,
     which was not at issue at trial, concluded that on the facts
     of the case, there was no need for further detention to
     complete the stop because the smell of marijuana or its smoke
     emanating from the vehicle constituted probable cause to
     arrest the occupants, that the balance weighed in favor of the
     public interest, and that the search was reasonable.


     Petition for Review of the Arkansas Court of Appeals;
affirmed.
     William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by:  Kent C. Krause,
Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  J. Brent Standridge, Asst.
Att'y Gen., for appellee.

     Donald L. Corbin, Justice.
     We granted the State's petition to review the decision of the
court of appeals in this case where the sole issue is whether the
odor of marijuana or the smell of marijuana smoke emanating from a
legally stopped vehicle constitutes probable cause to search the
occupants.  The trial court ruled that probable cause existed,
convicted Appellant Alton Levern Brunson of one count of possession
of a controlled substance, fined him $250, imposed court costs, and
sentenced him to five years' probation.  The court of appeals
reversed, holding there was no probable cause to conduct the
warrantless search of Appellant's person.  Brunson v. State, 54
Ark. App. 248, 925 S.W.2d 434 (1996).  After granting a petition
for review following a decision by the court of appeals, we review
the case as though the appeal was originally filed with this court. 
Mullinax v. State, 327 Ark. 41, ___ S.W.2d ___ (1997); Allen v.
State, 326 Ark. 541, 932 S.W.2d 764 (1996).  Upon our review, we
conclude the trial court did not err in denying Appellant's motion
to suppress and therefore affirm the judgment of conviction.
     Appellant was charged by information with one count of felony
possession of cocaine and one count of misdemeanor possession of
marijuana.  He moved to suppress the evidence obtained from the
search of his person on the bases that he was searched without a
warrant, without benefit of reasonable suspicion that he was armed
and dangerous, and without probable cause to believe that he had
committed a felony.  After a bench trial, the trial court denied
the motion to suppress.  Upon his conviction, the misdemeanor was
merged with the felony.
     In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence, we
make an independent examination based upon the totality of the
circumstances and reverse only if the decision is clearly against
the preponderance of the evidence.  Mullinax, 327 Ark. 41, ___
S.W.2d ___; Crail v. State, 309 Ark. 120,