State v. Woods

Decision Date03 February 2015
Docket NumberNo. 1 CA–CR 13–0655.,1 CA–CR 13–0655.
Citation705 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 14,342 P.3d 863
PartiesSTATE of Arizona, Appellant, v. Anthony Jerome WOODS, Appellee.
CourtArizona Court of Appeals

342 P.3d 863
705 Ariz.
Adv. Rep. 14

STATE of Arizona, Appellant,
v.
Anthony Jerome WOODS, Appellee.

No. 1 CA–CR 13–0655.

Court of Appeals of Arizona,
Division 1.

Feb. 3, 2015.



Reversed and remanded.


[342 P.3d 864]


Maricopa County Attorney's Office, By Arthur Hazelton, Phoenix, Counsel for Appellant.

Anthony Jerome Woods, Tucson, Appellee.


Judge RANDALL M. HOWE delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Presiding Judge PATRICIA A. OROZCO and Judge MAURICE PORTLEY joined.
OPINION

HOWE, Judge:

¶ 1 The State of Arizona appeals the superior court's grant of Anthony Jerome Woods's motion to suppress evidence of marijuana packages discovered in his car. The superior court ruled that a police officer did not have reasonable suspicion to detain Woods for a narcotics dog sniff of his car despite Woods's extensive criminal history of drug transportation and the officer's testimony that circumstances indicated that Woods's actions were suspicious. Upon our de novo review whether the undisputed facts constitute reasonable suspicion, we hold that the police officer had reasonable suspicion to detain Woods for the dog sniff. We therefore reverse the superior court's ruling and remand for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2 At the time of the evidentiary hearing, Officer McWhirter had served the Arizona Department of Public Safety as a patrol officer for more than 11 years. He had more than “200 some hours” of classroom training on drug interdiction and spent two months assigned to the Casa Grande drug canine unit riding with canine officers and “specifically working interdictions.” During his career, he had personally seized “a lot of drug loads” and “a lot of human smuggling loads.”

[342 P.3d 865]

In 2010 alone, he interdicted 1,500 pounds of marijuana and 14 pounds of cocaine and seized “between 50 and 75 vehicles” for human smuggling.

¶ 3 At 5:45 a.m. on November 23, 2010, Officer McWhirter stopped Woods on Interstate 10 in Chandler for swerving his car and traveling at varying speeds. The officer approached Woods to obtain his driver's license and vehicle registration, which Woods provided, along with a rental car agreement. When the officer asked Woods where he was going, Woods stated that he was going to visit a friend in Phoenix who had cancer. Woods added that he was taking his friend to “rehab,” but could not identify which hospital or the type of rehabilitation. Woods's answers “confused” and “perplexed” Officer McWhirter and made him suspicious.

¶ 4 Seeing no personal belongings in the car, Officer McWhirter asked Woods if he planned to stay in Phoenix. Woods stated that he did not. The officer then ran a records check, which revealed that Woods had “a very, very big rap sheet with drugs” and “an extremely extensive background” of transporting and manufacturing drugs in Chicago.

¶ 5 Officer McWhirter then asked Woods for consent to search his car, and Woods agreed to the search and signed a consent form. The officer discovered two plain and unaddressed cardboard shipping boxes in the trunk. The boxes were sealed with tape and had a “very solid weight,” weighing between five and ten pounds. The officer believed that the boxes were consistent with packages used for transporting drugs. When the officer asked Woods about the contents of the boxes, Woods replied that they were “Christmas presents” that he was going to ship once he was in Phoenix. He asked Woods why the boxes “didn't have any address labels or anything” and were “just completely plain.” Woods “didn't have a good reason why they weren't labeled” and merely said that he was going to do it in Phoenix. These statements and the discovery of the boxes further raised Officer McWhirter's suspicions about Woods's activity. He asked if he could open the packages, but Woods refused.

¶ 6 Officer McWhirter then requested that a narcotics dog be brought to the scene. No city police canine unit was on duty that early in the morning; the closest canine unit was in Maricopa. When that unit arrived about 40 minutes later, the narcotics dog sniffed the car and alerted on the trunk and bit one of the boxes. A search of the boxes revealed marijuana. The State subsequently charged Woods with one count of sale or transportation of marijuana and alleged that Woods had several historical prior convictions and committed the offense while on community supervision release.

¶ 7 Woods moved to suppress evidence of the marijuana. Although he did not contest the validity of the initial stop, he argued that once he refused to allow the officer to search the boxes, reasonable suspicion did not exist to detain him until the narcotics dog arrived. He also argued the length of his detention awaiting the narcotics dog was unreasonable. At the subsequent evidentiary hearing, the superior court heard testimony from Officer McWhirter about the stop and the search.

¶ 8 The superior court suppressed the evidence. Although the court found that the initial stop and subsequent search of the car pursuant to Woods's consent were lawful, it ruled that once Woods refused to allow Officer McWhirter to search the boxes, Officer McWhirter had no information “to suggest a basis for reasonable suspicion as to the transportation of illegal substances.” The court acknowledged that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • State v. Woods
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • February 3, 2015
    ...Ariz. 527342 P.3d 863705 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 14STATE of Arizona, Appellantv.Anthony Jerome WOODS, Appellee.No. 1 CA–CR 13–0655.Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1.Feb. 3, 2015.342 P.3d 864Maricopa County Attorney's Office, By Arthur Hazelton, Phoenix, Counsel for Appellant.Anthony Jerome Wo......

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