Court Opinion

ID: 9682304
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 08:09:11.487599+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:38.662338
License: Public Domain

ON REMAND FROM THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
HOWELL, Justice,
concurring
I concur in result only. This writer would hold that the stop was lawful and that the chain of circumstances transpiring thereafter made the search of the trunk lawful. The writer would further hold that, on the basis of the totality of circumstances then existing, the officers were possessed of probable cause and a reasonable necessity to immediately proceed to search the luggage without a warrant. It follows that the warrant was unnecessary and may be disregarded as surplusage.
The majority states that the evidence found in the luggage was not a fruit of the impoundment and that the warrant could still have been executed if the car had been left on the street. Although this writer agrees that appellant had no standing to complain, the statement is unsound. At that particular time, Charlesworth was only under arrest for possession of a forged driver’s license. The only justification for search of the trunk was pre-im-poundment inventory. Until the inventory search, the officers did not have probable cause to obtain a warrant. Thus, if they had “simply left the automobile on the street,” the officers never could have obtained the warrant.
*451The majority has further turned aside challenges to the warrant on strength of United States v. Leon, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984) and Adams v. State, 683 S.W.2d 525 (Tex.App.— Dallas 1984, no pet.). However, appellant has invoked both federal and state law in support of his motion to suppress making Adams (motion based only on federal grounds) distinguishable. The majority assumes, rather than decides, that Leon is a principle of Texas law. See Kann v. State, 694 S.W.2d 156 (Tex.App. — Dallas 1985) (Howell concurring). The question is a serious one and should not be conclusorily decided. However, inasmuch as the warrant was surplusage, the question need not be reached on this record.
For reasons stated, I concur in the result.