State v. Smith

• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Warner, J.
• Citation: State v. Smith, 59 Kan.App.2d 28, 476 P.3d 847 (Kan. App. 2020)
• Decision Date: 23 October 2020
• Docket Number: No. 121,619,121,619
• Parties: STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Brittany R. SMITH, Appellant.

59 Kan.App.2d 28

476 P.3d 847

STATE of Kansas, Appellee,

v.Brittany R. SMITH, Appellant.

No. 121,619

Court of Appeals of Kansas.

Opinion filed October 23, 2020

James M. Latta, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, for appellant.

Natasha Esau, assistant district attorney, Keith Schroeder, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for appellee.

Before Warner, P.J., Standridge and Gardner, JJ.

Warner, J.:

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects our right to be free from unreasonable searches. In general, this means that law enforcement officers must obtain a warrant before initiating a search of a person or property. But in some instances, other considerations—such as the need to provide emergency assistance to someone who has an immediate and serious medical condition—justifies a warrantless search. This case presents such an instance.

Brittany Smith appeals her convictions of possession of methamphetamine, possession of paraphernalia, and driving under the influence, claiming the district court should have suppressed evidence obtained when police officers searched her purse without a warrant. That search occurred after the officers found Smith unresponsive in a running car parked in someone else's driveway. After failing to rouse Smith, the officers removed her from the car, but she remained largely unresponsive and appeared to be suffering an overdose. When emergency medical personnel arrived at the scene, the officers searched Smith's purse, looking for her identification and any information regarding substances she may have ingested. Under these circumstances, we—like the district court—conclude the scope of the officers' warrantless search was reasonable and confined to assist in addressing Smith's medical emergency. Thus, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In the early morning hours of February 18, 2018, two officers from the Hutchinson Police Department—Officer Hannah Brown and Sergeant Eric Buller—went to check on a woman who had apparently fallen asleep in her car. The sleeping woman, later identified as Smith, had been delivering the local paper when she backed into a residential driveway; a concerned neighbor called the police after Smith remained in the running car for 45 minutes, hunched over behind the wheel.

The officers approached the vehicle and began knocking on the slightly cracked driver's side window, attempting to wake Smith. When Smith did not rouse, Officer Brown said, "I'm gonna open the door. She's not responding." The officers continued to bang on the window for several minutes, but Smith remained unresponsive. Upon seeing paperwork on top of a bundle of newspapers with the name "Brittany Smith" on it, Officer Brown called dispatch and attempted to confirm Smith's identity; she stated "Brittany Smith is the paper carrier listed for this route" and then asked dispatch to "locate anything in house for a Brittany Smith." Dispatch informed Officer Brown that there were two Brittany Smiths in the system with similar dates of birth, heights, weights, and physical descriptions.

While Officer Brown spoke to dispatch, Sergeant Buller unsuccessfully attempted to pull down the driver's side window but managed to widen the opening. The officers then attempted to use a lockout kit—essentially a stick with a hook—to open the car door. Sergeant Buller poked Smith in the head with the lockout tool numerous times, but she remained unresponsive. Another officer told Officer Brown over the radio that he was familiar with a Brittany Smith who had a history of opioid use, so the officers decided to call EMS, concerned that Smith was potentially overdosing. At that time, Officer Brown was still not "100 percent" certain about which Brittany Smith she was dealing with.

The officers were eventually able to get the car door open with the lockout tool. When the door opened, Smith slumped forward and Officer Brown pulled her up by her hoodie; Smith put her hands to her face and gradually began to wake up, but she remained unresponsive and continued to cover her face. Hutchinson firefighters and paramedics soon arrived and began to provide Smith with emergency medical care. Officer Brown asked her if her name was "Brittany Smith"; Smith nodded in response, but Officer Brown was still unsure which Brittany Smith she was.

As the emergency medical personnel took over, Officer Brown stated she was "familiar with [Smith]" and mentioned the possibility that Smith was overdosing on opioids. Officer Brown then briefly patted Smith down to check for any needles; Smith remained confused and largely unresponsive as she mumbled short, incoherent responses to questions from Officer Brown and EMS.

As the firefighters and paramedics were caring for Smith, Officer Brown stated, "Where's her purse? I'm gonna try to find her ID." Officer Brown then asked Smith for consent to search her purse to confirm her identity and "[t]o make sure she was treated correctly [by EMS] and make sure she—it was her." At this point, Officer Brown had confirmed Smith's birthday with dispatch prior to searching the purse and "had a strong idea of who she was." Officer Brown later testified that the main reason she searched the purse was to look for Smith's identification. But Officer Brown also stated she was looking for prescriptions in Smith's purse, trying to help inform EMS about what Smith might have overdosed on.

When looking through Smith's purse, Officer Brown found prescription and nonprescription medications and a pipe covered with "crystal-like residue and burnt residue." Smith's identity was confirmed via the prescription medications, but Officer Brown never found her driver's license. By the time Officer Brown finished the search of the purse, Smith had been loaded in the ambulance.

After Smith headed to the hospital in the ambulance, Officer Brown began searching Smith's car, looking "[f]or identification and any substance, prescriptions, nonprescription that she might have ODd on." Officer Brown found a spoon with a cotton ball and residue on it under the car's radio. The officer then went to speak to Smith at the hospital, advised her of her Miranda rights, and interviewed her about the drugs and paraphernalia found in the purse and car.

The State charged Smith with one count of possession of methamphetamine, one count of possession of paraphernalia, and one count of driving under the influence. Smith filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from her purse and car, arguing that the officers' continued search of her vehicle and purse was unlawful because she was too intoxicated to consent to the search and that the search was not justified as part of the officer's efforts to provide her with emergency aid. Smith also moved to suppress the statements she made at the hospital, contending she was too intoxicated to knowingly and voluntarily waive her Miranda rights.

The court suppressed the evidence seized from Smith's car and elicited from her statements in the hospital. But it denied Smith's motion with regard to the evidence found in her purse, explaining:

"The officers had been given the information that Ms. Smith had arrived recently, so apparently had parked in a driveway and was definitely incapacitated and she was in an operable vehicle and that triggers the public safety exception, not only for herself, but the rest of the public.... I'm not questioning at the preliminary the officer testified she looked only for I.D. but today she testified that she was looking in the purse for prescriptions also, and it is reasonable to me in the course of a safety stop to find something that might help the hospital treat Ms. Smith, because she definitely needed treatment. And so assuming the officer was also looking for evidence of prescriptions, or whatever Ms. Smith had consumed, if she had, to me the purse search is valid."

Smith's case proceeded to a bench trial on stipulated facts. She was convicted of all charges. Because of Smith's participation in drug treatment and her recent progress in refraining from drug use, the district court granted Smith a departure sentence, suspending the 30-month controlling sentence and imposing 12 months' probation. Smith now appeals.

DISCUSSION

On appeal, Smith renews her arguments from her motion to suppress, claiming Officer Brown's search of her purse after emergency medical personnel arrived at the scene was unlawful. Smith argues that the evidence obtained from search should have been excluded and urges this court to remand the case for a new trial without the pipe and methamphetamine found in her purse.

We review the factual underpinnings of a district court's decision on a motion to suppress evidence for substantial competent evidence and its ultimate legal conclusion de novo. State v. Doelz , 309 Kan. 133, 138, 432 P.3d 669 (2019). When, as here, the material facts are not in dispute, the constitutionality of a search is a question of law over which our review is unlimited. State v. Stevenson , 299 Kan. 53, 57-58, 321 P.3d 754 (2014). Although a defendant initiates a constitutional challenge to a search or seizure by filing a motion to suppress the evidence in question, the State has the burden to prove any challenged police conduct was permissible. K.S.A. 22-3216(2) ; State v. Cleverly , 305 Kan. 598, 605, 385 P.3d 512 (2016).

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, protects "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." Section 15 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights provides "the same protection from unlawful government searches and seizures as the Fourth Amendment." State v. Daniel , 291 Kan. 490, 498, 242 P.3d 1186 (2010). Under both the Fourth Amendment and section 15, warrantless searches and seizures by law enforcement officers are deemed unreasonable and...