State v. Johnson

• Decision Date: 12 April 2011
• Docket Number: Nos. 20100240,20100242.,20100241,s. 20100240
• Citation: 2011 ND 48,795 N.W.2d 367
• Parties: STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appelleev.Daryl Gene JOHNSON, Defendant and Appellant.
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

795 N.W.2d 367
2011 ND 48

STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Daryl Gene JOHNSON, Defendant and Appellant.

Nos. 20100240

20100241

20100242.

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

March 22, 2011.Rehearing Denied April 12, 2011.

[795 N.W.2d 368]

Ronald W. McBeth (submitted on brief), Assistant State's Attorney, Wahpeton, ND, for plaintiff and appellee.Steven M. Light (argued), Fargo, ND, for defendant and appellant.CROTHERS, Justice.

[¶ 1] Daryl G. Johnson appeals the district court's judgment entered after his conditional plea of guilty to the charges of possession of a controlled substance, manufacture of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. Johnson argues that the warrant issued to search his residence and other property was not supported by probable cause and that the evidence seized during the search must be suppressed. We affirm.

I

[¶ 2] On March 24, 2010, law enforcement executed a search warrant for Johnson's residence and vehicle. During the search, law enforcement found drug paraphernalia, items associated with a methamphetamine

[795 N.W.2d 369]

lab and methamphetamine. The search warrant was obtained based on evidence provided at the search warrant application hearing held on March 24, 2010.

[¶ 3] At the hearing, Christopher Karlgaard, a peace officer with the Southeast Multi–County Agency Drug Task Force, testified about his investigation of Johnson. Karlgaard explained law enforcement received a warrant to search Brooke Kieffer's residence a week before the hearing. On March 23, 2010, law enforcement executed the warrant for Kieffer's residence, finding marijuana, paraphernalia for marijuana and methamphetamine paraphernalia and also finding a methamphetamine syringe on Kieffer. Karlgaard interviewed Kieffer, and she told him she used the syringe to inject methamphetamine Johnson provided at his residence on March 22 and 23, 2010. Karlgaard also observed needle marks on Kieffer's arms.

[¶ 4] Karlgaard testified he performed surveillance on Kieffer on March 23, 2010, seeing Kieffer spending time with Johnson, seeing Kieffer and Johnson enter and exit Johnson's residence, at one point spending forty-five minutes inside his residence, seeing Kieffer and Johnson enter Johnson's vehicle and seeing Kieffer and Johnson enter Kieffer's vehicle.

[¶ 5] Karlgaard stated that the drug task force has been gathering information about Johnson for four or five years and that many known drug users were associated with Johnson and were observed going to Johnson's house. A confidential informant completed a controlled buy at Johnson's home in 2008. The buy was monitored, but during the buy, a loud noise prevented law enforcement from hearing the confidential informant and Johnson's conversation. The informant came out of Johnson's house with one gram of methamphetamine. The informant stated the noise was from Johnson turning on a vacuum cleaner. The confidential informant stated Johnson was paranoid and checked him for a wiretap.

[¶ 6] Karlgaard testified a cigarette package containing a meth pipe and two small baggies of methamphetamine was found in Johnson's neighbor's yard. The neighbor who called police about the cigarette package suspected it belonged to Johnson or to one of Johnson's friends, but Karlgaard had little evidence that was true. The district court found probable cause existed to issue the search warrant for Johnson's residence, vehicle and shed.

[¶ 7] Based on the evidence found during a search of Johnson's residence, on March 29, 2010, Johnson was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, manufacture of a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of marijuana and possession of marijuana drug paraphernalia. Johnson pled not guilty and moved to suppress the evidence found in his residence and in his vehicle. The State opposed the motion. The district court denied Johnson's motion to suppress, and Johnson entered a conditional guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance, manufacture of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. The district court entered judgment based on Johnson's guilty plea. Johnson appealed.

II

[¶ 8] Johnson argues the district court erred by not suppressing the evidence obtained during the search because the search warrant was not supported by probable cause. The State claims the district court properly concluded the search warrant was supported by probable cause. We agree with the State.

[795 N.W.2d 370]

[¶ 9] “A district court's decision to deny a motion to suppress ‘will not be reversed [on appeal] if there is sufficient competent evidence capable of supporting the district court's findings, and ... if its decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.’ ” State v. Poitra, 2010 ND 137, ¶ 13, 785 N.W.2d 225 (quoting State v....