State v. Higgins, 7226SC728
| Decision Date | 22 November 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 7226SC728,7226SC728 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Paul HIGGINS. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Atty. Gen. Robert Morgan by Henry E. Poole, Associate Atty. Gen., for the State.
James J. Caldwell, Charlotte, for defendant appellant.
Defendant's first assignment of error challenges the admissibility of the green bottle and the 17 foil packets it contained on the grounds that they were discovered as the result of a warrantless search of an automobile at a time and place remote from the arrest of defendant. Defendant had not objected to earlier testimony that the State's Exhibit (the green bottle containing foil packages) contained heroin. Upon defendant's objection, the court excused the jury, conducted a Voir dire and, upon findings of fact which are supported by the evidence, concluded that the search was lawful and allowed the exhibit in evidence.
A warrantless search and seizure based upon a reasonable belief arising out of circumstances known by the seizing officers that an automobile contained articles which the officers are entitled to seize has been held to be valid. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543; Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160, 69 S.Ct. 1302, 93 L.Ed. 1879. A warrantless search and seizure based upon probable cause has been held to be lawful though conducted at a time and place remote from the time and place of the original detention of the vehicle. Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d 419. In Chambers, the police had probable cause to believe that four men, carrying guns and the fruits of a robbery, had fled the scene of the crime in a car of a particular description. Based upon this probable cause, the police stopped a particular car, took the occupants into custody, removed the car to the police garage and searched it without a warrant, seizing certain incriminating evidence which was used to convict the occupants of the car. Discussing the choices of immediately conducting a warrantless search based upon probable cause at the scene and on the other hand seizing and holding a car before presenting the probable cause issue to a magistrate, the court concluded that, 'Given probable cause to search, either course is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.'
In the present case, the record discloses that the police had probable cause,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. White
...for the original search is admissible. Harris v. United States, 331 U.S. 145, 67 S.Ct. 1098, 91 L.Ed. 1399 (1947); State v. Higgins, 16 N.C.App. 581, 192 S.E.2d 699 (1972). We hold that under the facts in this case, the court did not err in admitting the challenged Defendant next contends t......
-
State v. Higgins
...J. Caldwell, for defendant. Petition for writ of certiorari by defendant to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 192 S.E.2d 699. Denied. Appeal dismissed for lack of substantial constitutional ...