State v. Julian

• Decision Date: 31 July 1996
• Docket Number: No. 21703,21703
• Citation: 922 P.2d 1059,129 Idaho 133
• Parties: The STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brian Kenneth JULIAN, Defendant-Respondent. Boise, January 1996 Term
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

Page 1059

922 P.2d 1059

129 Idaho 133

The STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brian Kenneth JULIAN, Defendant-Respondent.

No. 21703.

Supreme Court of Idaho,

Boise, January 1996 Term.

July 31, 1996.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 18, 1996.

Alan G. Lance, Attorney General; Gerald L. Wolff, Special Deputy Attorney General (argued), Caldwell, for appellant.

Manweiler, Bevis and Cameron, Boise, for respondent. Mark H. Manweiler argued.

SILAK, Justice.

The state of Idaho (the State) appeals from the district court's order suppressing items seized during an inventory search of Brian Julian (Julian). The district court invalidated the underlying arrest because it concluded that Julian was arrested for misdemeanor domestic battery at a scene other than that of the alleged domestic disturbance. We reverse and remand.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Prior to May 20, 1994, Julian and his wife had been separated for approximately six weeks. While visiting her at their residence, Julian discovered a flower arrangement sent to Mrs. Julian by a high school friend of the Julians. Julian called the friend and the two got into a heated argument over the phone. What occurred next is disputed by the parties, but the district court found that there was some type of struggle between the Julians and, during the course of the struggle, Mrs. Julian's arm was broken.

Afterwards, Mrs. Julian attempted to use the pre-programmed 911 number on her phone. Instead, she mistakenly hit the redial button and rang the acquaintance's residence in the state of Washington. When the friend answered the phone, Mrs. Julian asked if she had reached 911, realized her mistake and hung up. The Julians then left for St. Luke's Regional Medical Center. In the meantime, the friend realized that it was Mrs. Julian who had just called him. He called the Ada County Sheriff's dispatch and reported that he believed Mrs. Julian was being battered by Julian. Ada County dispatched two deputies to the Julian residence.

Deputies Wright and Monson arrived at the Julian residence at approximately 1:30 a.m. The deputies' repeated knocks on the front door went unanswered as did a telephone call placed by the Ada County dispatcher. Receiving no response from inside, the deputies entered the Julian home through the unlocked front door. Once inside, the deputies allegedly discovered a blood stained rag sitting on the kitchen counter and items lying on the floor which evidenced a struggle. None of these items were seized or photographed. While the deputies were searching the home, Ada County dispatch informed the deputies that the Julians were at St. Luke's Regional Medical Center. The deputies exited the home and proceeded to the hospital.

The sequence of events at the hospital are also disputed, but it appears that a third deputy, Deputy Buzzini, arrived at the hospital prior to Deputies Monson and Wright's arrival at 2:15 a.m. A hospital security guard alerted the three deputies that Julian was sitting in his car in the emergency room parking lot. Deputy Monson asked Julian to step out of the car and conducted a pat search. Deputy Buzzini then went inside to talk to Julian's wife while the other deputies continued to speak with Julian. Following his interview with Mrs. Julian, Deputy Buzzini signaled the other deputies to arrest Julian. The deputies cited Julian for misdemeanor domestic battery, Section 18-918 of the Idaho Code. He was transported to the Ada County jail, where, during a standard inventory search, a small glass vial of cocaine fell out of his shoe.

Although the arrest citation was issued for misdemeanor domestic battery, the State The State appealed.

                charged Julian with aggravated battery, Sections 18-903 and 18-907(a) of the Idaho Code, and possession of a controlled substance under Section 37-2732(c) of the Idaho Code.  The State subsequently dismissed the aggravated battery charge.  Following the preliminary hearing, Julian moved the district court for an order suppressing the items seized during the inventory search.  In ruling on the motion, the district court noted that Section 19-603(6) of the Idaho Code only allows an arrest for domestic battery to be made "at the scene of a domestic disturbance."   Since no acts of domestic battery had occurred at St. Luke's Regional Medical Center, the court concluded that the deputies had no authority to arrest Julian and suppressed the items subsequently seized from him.  Alternatively, the court held that if it were to find that Julian was arrested for an offense other than that of domestic battery, Julian was not properly informed of the "cause of arrest" as required by Section 19-608 of the Idaho Code
                

II. ISSUES ON APPEAL

1. Did the district court err in ruling that Julian was not lawfully arrested and placed into police custody?

A. Did probable cause exist for Julian's arrest?

B. Is the fact that Julian was issued a citation for domestic battery relevant to the validity of his arrest?

2. Did the district court err in ruling that the cocaine was not lawfully seized from Julian's person?

A. Was there a valid seizure incident to Julian's arrest?

B. Was there a valid seizure pursuant to an inventory of Julian's possessions at the time of his being booked into the Ada County Jail?

III. STANDARD OF REVIEW

When reviewing a trial court's treatment of a motion to suppress, this Court will overturn factual findings made by the trial court only if they are clearly erroneous. State v. Weber, 116 Idaho 449, 452, 776 P.2d 458, 461 (1989). However, the Court "may undertake a free review of the trial court's determination as to whether constitutional requirements have been satisfied in light of facts found." Id. quoting State v. Heinen, 114 Idaho 656, 658, 759 P.2d 947, 949 (Ct.App.1988). The measuring of the facts as found by the district court against the constitutional standard of reasonableness is the ultimate responsibility of the appellate court. Heinen, 114 Idaho at 658, 759 P.2d at 949.

IV. ANALYSIS

A. The Fact That The Officers Cited Julian For Misdemeanor Domestic Battery Does Not Preclude An Inquiry Into Whether An Objective Assessment Of The Facts Supports A Finding of Probable Cause To Arrest For A Related Felony.

A vial of cocaine was discovered in Julian's shoe during a custodial inventory search of Julian's person and property. Custodial inventory searches, so long as performed according to standardized police procedures, have been held to be permissible under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. State v. Smith, 120 Idaho 77, 80, 813 P.2d 888, 891 (1991). However, a valid arrest of the person searched is a condition precedent to a valid inventory search. Id. Whether or not an arrest was legal is governed by state law. United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 420-21 n. 8, 96 S.Ct. 820, 826-27 n. 8, 46 L.Ed.2d 598 (1976); State v. Pontier, 95 Idaho 707, 712, 518 P.2d 969, 974 (1974).

The Idaho Legislature prescribed the circumstances under which a peace officer may arrest. I.C. § 19-603. Idaho's arrest statute provides:

When peace officer may arrest.--A peace officer may make an arrest in obedience to a warrant delivered to him, or may, without a warrant, arrest a person:

1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.

2. When a person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence.

3. When a felony has in fact been committed and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

4. On a charge made, upon reasonable cause, of the commission of a felony by the party arrested.

5. At night, when there is reasonable cause to believe that he has committed a felony.

6. When at the scene of a domestic disturbance there is reasonable cause to believe, based on physical evidence observed by the officer or statements made in the presence of an officer upon immediate response to a report of a commission of such a crime, that the person arrested has committed an assault or battery. ¹

Id.

We note that in interpreting the arrest statute the district court concluded:

The remaining provision in the arrest statute, I.C. § 19-603(6), permits arrest for a domestic battery only "[w]hen at the scene of a domestic disturbance...." The arrest took place at the hospital, and there is no allegation in the record that any domestic disturbance occurred at the hospital. The citation issued to Julian upon his arrest indicates that the offense for which Julian was arrested took place at "2011 Ridge Point Wy., Boise." The same citation states that the arrest took place at the "St. Luke's E.R. parking lot." There is no evidence in the record to support the conclusion that Julian was arrested at the scene of a domestic disturbance. The pertinent facts conceded by the state establish that Julian's arrest exceeded the scope of the arrest statute.

The district court also held that because Julian was arrested for domestic battery, the subsections in the arrest statute dealing with warrantless felony arrest were facially inapplicable. We disagree and hold that the fact that the officers cited Julian for domestic battery does not render the other subsections of the arrest statute facially inapplicable. Because we so hold we need not interpret the "when at the scene of a domestic disturbance" requirement of I.C. § 19-603(6).

In addition to allowing an officer to make an arrest for the commission of the crimes enumerated in subsection 6, the arrest statute allows for a warrantless felony arrest based upon reasonable cause. I.C. § 19-603(3). Reasonable or probable cause is the possession of information that would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to believe or entertain an honest and strong presumption that such person is guilty. State v. Alger, 100 Idaho 675, 677, 603 P.2d 1009, 1011 (1979). Probable cause is not measured by the same level of proof required for conviction. Id. Rather, it deals with "the factual and practical...