# FILED Dec emb er 2 8, 19 95 Cec il Crow son , Jr . Ap p e l l a te C o u rt C l e rk IN T HE C OU RTOF C RI MI NA L A PPEA LS OF T EN NE SSEE

A T JACKSON MA Y 1995 SESSI ON

STA TE OF T EN NE SSEE, ) ) C. C. A . N O. 02C 01- 9412- CC -0 0298 Appel lee , ) ) HENRY

COUNTY V S
. ) ) HON. JULIA N P. GUINN, RA Y A NT HO NY

B RI DG ES, ) JUD GE ) Appel lan t. ) (P oss ess ion of coc ain e w it h i ntent ) to sell) SEPA RA

TE CO NC UR RI NG OPI NI ON
Al thoug h I ag re e w it h the maj or ity in the resul ts, I must re spectfull y di sag re e w it h the reason ing appl ied i n i ss ue 2 re g ardin g the sei z ure of the pil l bottl e. In footnot e number four of the maj or ity

opi nio n, t he aut hor

makes note of

a poss ibl y

"ov er ly st ri ng ent probabl e c ause sta ndard" appli ed in State v . W hit e, N o. 03 C01 -9 408- CR -0 0277, Sul li v an Co u n ty ( T e n n . C ri m . A p p . f il e d J u n e 7 , 1 9 9 5 , a tK n o xvil le ). I n W h it e I wro t e se p a ra t e ly, conte n d ing thatthe dis cov er y of a fil m cani ste r ins ide the defendant' s s hor ts w as "im me diate ly

app aren t" and would have bee n prop erly seized in a T erry stop an d f risk. I bas ed th at c oncl usi on on tes ti mony of the o ff ic er

co ncer nin g t h e c u st o m of car ry ing coc ain e i n fil m cani ste rsal ong w it h t h e f a ctthatthe cani ste r w as conc eal ed i n the de fen da nt ' s u nd ers ho rts , no t a no r ma l p l ac e to c ar r y e i th er e x po s ed o r

u ne x po s ed fi l m. In the cas e u n d e r

re v i e w , h o w e v e r , I a m n o tre a d y t o c o n c l u d e t h a tthe f inding of

a prescription pill bo t t le i n a defend ant 's jacket me ets th e "im me diate ly apparent" t est . In t hisca se, the off ic er had re cei v ed i nformati on f ro m a co nfidenti al informa nt th at th e defend ant w as down at "p reach er's place" in the "b otto m" dea ling crack coc ain e at the t ime of the c all . The in formant furth e r a d vi sed the o ff ic er thatthe2

defendant was in poss ess ion of money and dr ug s a t t hat p arti cul ar ti me. The off ic er testif ied th at th is informa nt ha d previously f urnishe d informa tion tha t had led to an arrest and c onv icti o n and that the i nformant had al w ays b een s traig htforward, ho nestand re li abl e i n g iv ing i nformati on in the past. T he of ficer also tes ti fied that he had recei v ed at leas t hal f a d o z e n a n o n y mo u s t i p s c o n c e r n i n g t h e d e fe n d a n t ' s d e a l i n g d r u g s i n t h at par ti cul ar area. Fur

ther , t he officer

was aw are that the defendant w as a conv icted fel on and a conv icted d ru g deal er , and had been recent ly ar re ste d on a weapons ch arg e. If infor mati on pos ses sed by an o ff ic er

i s recei v ed from a n i nformant, the off ic ers mus t k now

thatthe info rm a n t h a s a bas is for h is i nformati on and that the infor mant i s c re ditab le o r his i nformati on reli abl e. Any defic ien cy

may be o v ercome, how ev er , by ind ependent pol ic e cor ro borati on. Stat e v . J acumi n, 77 8 S. W .2d 4 30, 4 36 (Te nn. 198 9); Sta te v. M arsha ll, 870 S. W .2d 532 , 539 (Ten n. Crim. Ap p. 19 93). In t hisca se I bel iev e tha t if t h e re wa s a defic ien cy , i t was ov ercome b y i ndependen t cor ro borati on.

I woul d hol d tha t t he officers h ad proba b le c ause to be li ev e tha t t he defend antwas selling cocain e and , w het her the search was incide nt to the de fend ant 's ar re st or bas ed upon reason abl e bel ief tha t t he bottl e c ontai ned i ll eg al dr ug s, the o ff ic er proper ly proceed ed w it hout obtai nin g a war ra nt.
Al thoug h for a di fferent re a so n , I co ncur i n the resul ts re ached by the m ajo ri ty.

_________ _________

_________

___ JO HN H. PE AY, Ju d ge