State v. Schuette, No. C1-87-2217

CourtCourt of Appeals of Minnesota
Writing for the CourtFOLEY
Citation423 N.W.2d 104
PartiesSTATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Scott David SCHUETTE, Appellant.
Decision Date17 May 1988
Docket NumberNo. C1-87-2217

Page 104

423 N.W.2d 104
STATE of Minnesota, Respondent,
v.
Scott David SCHUETTE, Appellant.
No. C1-87-2217.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota.
May 17, 1988.

Page 105

Syllabus by the Court

The search of defendant's car was supported by probable cause.

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Mary J. Theisen, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, for respondent.

Deborah K. Ellis, Thomson & Ellis, St. Paul, for appellant.

Heard, considered, and decided by FOLEY, P.J., and RANDALL and KALITOWSKI, JJ.

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

Appellant Scott David Schuette was convicted of possession of a controlled substance in violation of Minn.Stat. Secs. 152.09, subd. 1(2); 152.15, subd. 2(2); and 152.02, subd. 2(3) (1986). On appeal, Schuette claims the evidence should have been suppressed because it was the product of an improper search of his automobile. We affirm.

FACTS

On October 10, 1986, a Sibley County sheriff's deputy observed Schuette's van traveling in excess of the speed limit with the vehicle's headlights on high beam. After the deputy pulled Schuette's van over and approached it, he detected a strong odor of alcoholic beverages on or about Schuette.

Schuette failed the field sobriety tests and was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. When the deputy returned to Schuette's van to lock the doors, he observed one empty bottle behind the driver's seat and a six-pack beer carton located between the two front seats. The six-pack contained one full and one empty beer bottle.

The deputy also observed a large rolled-up grocery bag next to the six-pack. The deputy leaned into the van from the driver's side, opened the bag, and found two plastic baggies containing what later was confirmed to be approximately 3.4 ounces of marijuana. On the floor of the van, the deputy noticed a green wallet and cigarette rolling papers. The deputy removed the beer bottles, wallet, rolling papers, and marijuana from the van and transported Schuette to the Sibley County sheriff's department.

The trial court found that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Schuette was driving under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance. However, Schuette was convicted of possession of a controlled substance. Both the omnibus court and the trial court noted that the stop was lawful and that Schuette was arrested after failing field sobriety tests, and found that the beer bottles and paper bag were observed in plain view as the deputy secured the van. The trial court held that the deputy had a reason to believe there was an "open bottle" violation and that the paper bag may have concealed beer bottles. The trial court thus found that the warrantless search was proper and that the evidence would not be suppressed.

ISSUE

Was the search of Schuette's car supported by probable cause?

ANALYSIS

Schuette contends that the search of the grocery bag was not justified as incident to his arrest or supported by probable cause to suspect...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Gomez v. State, No. F-2005-526.
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 5, 2007
    ...at least one other court has addressed a nearly identical set of circumstances and reached a similar result. In State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104 (Minn.App.1988), the Minnesota Court of Appeals determined that an "officer's detection of an alcoholic odor emanating from an automobile constit......
  • State v. Williams, No. 102,950.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • July 6, 2012
    ...probable cause to search the car for an open container of alcohol. 168 P.3d at 1141–42. The Gomez court relied on State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn.App.1988), in which the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that an officer's detection of the odor of alcohol emanating from an car con......
  • State v. Larson, No. A07-0146 (Minn. App. 11/18/2008), No. A07-0146.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • November 18, 2008
    ...cause for the officer to search "anywhere in the passenger compartment where [ ] open bottles or cans might be found." State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn. App. 1988) (quoting State v. Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d 105, 109 (Minn. 1983)). Probable cause for such a search does not expire af......
  • State v. Allinder, No. A08-0068 (Minn. App. 2/10/2009), No. A08-0068
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • February 10, 2009
    ...Bigelow, 451 N.W.2d at 312-13; State v. Studdard, 352 N.W.2d 413, 415 (Minn. 1984); Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d at 110-11; State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn. App. 1988); State v. Nace, 404 N.W.2d at 361. Moreover, this court is not the appropriate court to construe a provision of the M......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Gomez v. State, No. F-2005-526.
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 5, 2007
    ...at least one other court has addressed a nearly identical set of circumstances and reached a similar result. In State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104 (Minn.App.1988), the Minnesota Court of Appeals determined that an "officer's detection of an alcoholic odor emanating from an automobile constit......
  • State v. Williams, No. 102,950.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • July 6, 2012
    ...probable cause to search the car for an open container of alcohol. 168 P.3d at 1141–42. The Gomez court relied on State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn.App.1988), in which the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that an officer's detection of the odor of alcohol emanating from an car con......
  • State v. Larson, No. A07-0146 (Minn. App. 11/18/2008), No. A07-0146.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • November 18, 2008
    ...cause for the officer to search "anywhere in the passenger compartment where [ ] open bottles or cans might be found." State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn. App. 1988) (quoting State v. Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d 105, 109 (Minn. 1983)). Probable cause for such a search does not expire af......
  • State v. Allinder, No. A08-0068 (Minn. App. 2/10/2009), No. A08-0068
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Minnesota
    • February 10, 2009
    ...Bigelow, 451 N.W.2d at 312-13; State v. Studdard, 352 N.W.2d 413, 415 (Minn. 1984); Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d at 110-11; State v. Schuette, 423 N.W.2d 104, 106 (Minn. App. 1988); State v. Nace, 404 N.W.2d at 361. Moreover, this court is not the appropriate court to construe a provision of the M......
  • 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