State v. Green, No. 3186.

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtHOWARD.
Citation341 S.C. 214,532 S.E.2d 896
PartiesSTATE of South Carolina, Respondent, v. Alonzo Clinton GREEN, Appellant.
Decision Date12 June 2000
Docket NumberNo. 3186.

341 S.C. 214
532 S.E.2d 896

STATE of South Carolina, Respondent,
v.
Alonzo Clinton GREEN, Appellant

No. 3186.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Submitted April 5, 2000.

Decided June 12, 2000.


341 S.C. 215
Coming B. Gibbs, Jr., of Gibbs & Holmes, of Charleston, for appellant

Attorney General Charles M. Condon, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh and Senior Assistant Attorney General Mark Rapoport, all of Columbia, and Solicitor David Price Schwacke, of North Charleston, for respondent.

HOWARD, Judge:

Alonzo Green was convicted and sentenced for trafficking in crack cocaine, possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of heroin, and possession of a handgun during the commission of a violent crime. Green appeals, arguing the trial court erred in (1) finding the arresting officer made a lawful stop based only on an uncorroborated anonymous

341 S.C. 216
tip; (2) finding a frisk for weapons was justified; and (3) finding the arresting officer acquired knowledge of drug possession while conducting a frisk for weapons. We reverse

FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY

While on duty at the corner of Morrison Drive and Romney Streets, Sgt. James Mackey (the officer) received a cellular telephone call from the Police Dispatcher. The officer was notified that a "black male by the name of Alonzo Green * * * was leaving the area of Bayside Manor." The anonymous caller also reported Green was driving a gray four-door Maxima and had just left a residence in Bayside Manor with a large sum of money and narcotics. While still on the telephone, the officer saw Green, whom he knew by sight, driving a gray Maxima traveling away from Bayside Manor. Based solely on the anonymous tip, the officer pulled Green over.

As the officer approached the vehicle, he noticed Green fumbling under the front seat. The officer testified that this fumbling led him to believe Green may have been in possession of a weapon. After asking Green to step out of the vehicle, the officer frisked him for weapons. Subsequent to this frisk, Green was found to be in possession of narcotics and a large some of money. The handgun was found later under the front seat of the vehicle.

Green's attorney moved to suppress the evidence, alleging the stop and the frisk were both violations of the Fourth Amendment. The trial judge denied the Motion to Suppress. Green was then convicted in a bench trial on May 4, 1999. This appeal follows.

DISCUSSION

Green argues the trial judge erred in finding the officer made a lawful stop and had reasonable suspicion based only on an uncorroborated anonymous tip. We agree.

The trial judge concluded the stop was proper and based his finding of probable cause1 for the stop on Alabama v. White,

341 S.C. 217
496 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2d 301 (1990). In White, police received an anonymous telephone tip that White would leave a particular apartment at a specific time with cocaine in her possession. The caller also informed police, in detail, what vehicle White would drive and her final destination. The police proceeded to the named location and witnessed a woman with an attache case enter a vehicle that matched the caller's description. They followed the vehicle for several miles and stopped the vehicle just short of the motel the caller described as White's final destination. A consensual search revealed marijuana and, after...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • State v. Pichardo, No. 4036.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 31 Octubre 2005
    ...finding. State v. Brockman, 339 S.C. 57, 528 S.E.2d 661 (2000); State v. Jones, 364 S.C. 51, 610 S.E.2d 846 (Ct.App.2005); State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000). The appellate court may only reverse where there is clear error. Id.; see also State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1, ......
  • The State v. Taylor, No. 4687.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 13 Mayo 2010
    ...the drug evidence should be suppressed based on Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000), and State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000). Specifically, he maintained this incident arose as the result of an unreliable anonymous tip. Additionally, ......
  • State v. Williams, No. 3550.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 9 Septiembre 2002
    ..."affirm if there is any evidence to support the ruling." Brockman, 339 S.C. at 66, 528 S.E.2d at 666. Subsequently, in State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000), this Court declared that Brockman "determined the appellate standard of review in Fourth Amendment search and se......
  • State v. Butler, No. 3601.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 24 Febrero 2003
    ...amendment search and seizure cases is limited to determining whether any evidence supports the trial court's finding." State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 219 n. 3, 532 S.E.2d 896, 898 n. 3 (Ct.App.2000) (relying on State v. Brockman, 339 S.C. 57, 528 S.E.2d 661 353 S.C. 389 LAW/ANALYSIS Butler a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • State v. Pichardo, No. 4036.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 31 Octubre 2005
    ...finding. State v. Brockman, 339 S.C. 57, 528 S.E.2d 661 (2000); State v. Jones, 364 S.C. 51, 610 S.E.2d 846 (Ct.App.2005); State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000). The appellate court may only reverse where there is clear error. Id.; see also State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1, ......
  • The State v. Taylor, No. 4687.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 13 Mayo 2010
    ...the drug evidence should be suppressed based on Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 120 S.Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000), and State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000). Specifically, he maintained this incident arose as the result of an unreliable anonymous tip. Additionally, ......
  • State v. Williams, No. 3550.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 9 Septiembre 2002
    ..."affirm if there is any evidence to support the ruling." Brockman, 339 S.C. at 66, 528 S.E.2d at 666. Subsequently, in State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 532 S.E.2d 896 (Ct.App.2000), this Court declared that Brockman "determined the appellate standard of review in Fourth Amendment search and se......
  • State v. Butler, No. 3601.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 24 Febrero 2003
    ...amendment search and seizure cases is limited to determining whether any evidence supports the trial court's finding." State v. Green, 341 S.C. 214, 219 n. 3, 532 S.E.2d 896, 898 n. 3 (Ct.App.2000) (relying on State v. Brockman, 339 S.C. 57, 528 S.E.2d 661 353 S.C. 389 LAW/ANALYSIS Butler a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT