Johnson v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 2002-CA-000630-MR.
| Decision Date | 16 May 2003 |
| Docket Number | NO. 2002-CA-000630-MR.,2002-CA-000630-MR. |
| Parties | MONTRIAL JOHNSON, APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, APPELLEE. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Linda Roberts Horsman, Assistant Public Advocate, Department of Public Advocacy, Frankfort, Kentucky, BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT.
Albert B. Chandler, III, Attorney General of Kentucky, Frankfort, Kentucky, and, Janine Coy Bowden, Assistant Attorney General, Frankfort, Kentucky, BRIEF FOR APPELLEE.
BEFORE: BARBER, BAKER, AND JOHNSON, JUDGES.
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
Appellant Montrial Johnson appeals the trial court's acceptance of his conditional guilty plea due to his assertion that he was not competent to stand trial. Johnson also appeals the court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence.
Johnson was seen speeding in a residential neighborhood. He refused to pull over, and a police chase ensued. When the vehicle came to a stop in the field behind a house, Johnson ran from the vehicle and was caught by police. Johnson was searched, and a cell phone and $925 were found in his pocket. A search of the scene turned up a car stereo faceplate case containing two baggies with crack cocaine in them. Johnson gave a false name when arrested, but his identity was later discerned.
Johnson claims that the search of his car after his arrest was improper and without warrant, and asserts that the evidence of cocaine found in that search should be suppressed. Johnson asserts that the faceplate case in which the cocaine was found could not be opened without a warrant. Johnson asserts that he was not in the proximity of the vehicle when the case was found, and thus the search was in violation of law.
An officer may search a car where there is reasonable suspicion that contraband may be in the vehicle, or in containers located in the vehicle. Gray v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 28 S.W.3d 316, 318. Furthermore, when an officer is legally in any location, he may seize and examine an object in plain view. Stogner v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 35 S.W.3d 831, 836. As Johnson admits that the container was outside his vehicle, in the field where the officers were in accordance with law while chasing the fleeing suspect, he cannot object to the seizure of the object laying there in plain view. The officers were entitled to seize and examine the case, and in so doing, were entitled to ascertain the presence of illegal substances inside the container.
In United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 102 S. Ct. 2157, 72 L. Ed. 2d 572, the United States Supreme Court permitted the search of a vehicle and containers within it where there was probable cause to believe contraband was transported in the vehicle. Where no such probable cause exists, the container may be seized and held for a brief time until a warrant is obtained prior to search. United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 103 S. Ct. 2637, 77 L. Ed. 2d 110. Johnson also asserts that as the case was found five feet from the driver's door of the vehicle, out in a field, there was no evidence linking him to the case.
The Commonwealth argues that this issue was not properly preserved for review, and therefore should not be reviewed on appeal. The record shows that Johnson was extremely uncooperative with counsel, and that defense counsel attempted to suppress the evidence from introduction at trial. Based on the arguments before the trial court, we may properly review this argument.
As Johnson was speeding, refused to stop the vehicle when requested to do so, and attempted to escape the officers both in his vehicle and on foot, the stop was lawful. Taylor v Commonwealth, Ky., 987 S.W.2d 302, 305. The faceplate case was not in the vehicle, and the Commonwealth asserts that its location outside the vehicle shows that it was "abandoned", and thus not subject to Fourth Amendment protections pursuant to United States v. Lewis, 40 F.3d 1325, 1334 (1st Cir. 1994). We disagree, and find that the proximity of the case to the vehicle makes it unlikely that the case was abandoned property.
As the Commonwealth notes, even had the police...
To continue reading
Request your trial