Youtz v. State
Decision Date | 15 July 1986 |
Docket Number | 5 Div. 915 |
Citation | 494 So.2d 189 |
Parties | James Allen YOUTZ and Linda Pope Youtz v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Joseph L. Dean, Jr. of Walker, Hill, Adams, Umbach, Herndon & Dean, Opelika, for appellant James Allen Youtz.
J.L. Chestnut, Jr. of Chestnut, Sanders, Sanders, Turner & Williams, Selma, for appellant Linda Pope Youtz.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen. and J. Anthony McLain and James F. Hampton, Spec. Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.
James Allen Youtz was convicted for trafficking in marijuana and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment and fined $25,000. His wife, Linda Pope Youtz, was convicted for possession of marijuana and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment. Their convictions are reversed because the police had no authority to enter their residence, make the arrests, and seize the marijuana.
The controlling facts on the governing issue of this case are undisputed. In March of 1984, the Auburn Police Department was ending a six-month undercover drug operation which ultimately resulted in twenty-nine arrests. Officer Alex Smith testified that "we were in the process of closing down our six-month investigation, and making what we call a roundup, and making arrests on people who we had been buying drugs from over the last six months."
Between 7:00 and 8:00 on the evening of March 27, 1984, Officer Smith, working undercover, went to the residence of Brad Harris and Kevin Lamphere on Payne Street and asked Harris about purchasing marijuana. Smith had previously purchased drugs from both Lamphere and Harris. Harris told Smith that Andy Allen was "making a run" which meant that "he was going after some drugs." Allen returned to the residence and sold a bag of marijuana to Phillip Meeks, who sold part of the bag to Officer Smith. In addition to this transaction, the police had purchased drugs from Allen on two prior occasions.
Smith heard Allen say that he needed more marijuana and he overheard Allen telephone "someone named Jimmy" and state "that he was coming back to pick up another bag, ... And he wanted the caller [sic] to know that he was on his way over to get it." Allen then left and was arrested about one block from the residence.
Smith also left the residence and met with other officers who had been keeping Smith under surveillance. These officers then returned to the residence and arrested Meeks, Harris, and Lamphere and took them and Drew Warman, who was also present at the residence, to the police station.
Sergeant Gary Black of the Auburn Police Department testified that around the first of February or March, before Allen had been arrested, they had followed Allen to the defendants' residence. They subsequently ascertained that the residence belonged to the defendants and that "the power was registered" to the defendants on February 16, 1984. After his arrest, Allen was brought to the police station around 8:00 that night. He "was willing to cooperate." He told the police his source was Jimmy Youtz and agreed to make another buy. Detective Black instructed him
Allen was "wired" with a "body transmitter", provided with money, and taken to the defendants' residence on East Glenn Street at approximately 11:00 that night. The police remained outside, concealed and undetected, where they monitored the conversation inside the house. Five to seven minutes after Allen left the police car to enter the defendants' residence, Officers Smith and Black went to the residence and knocked on the door. Shortly after 11:00 that night, Jimmy Youtz answered the knock wearing a bathrobe. Officer Black identified himself and Officer Smith and asked Youtz four or five times who he was, but Youtz did not answer. Black then placed him under arrest, handcuffed and searched him, finding a bag of marijuana in the pocket of the robe. Apparently, this was the marijuana that Allen had requested to purchase. Allen and one Bryan Greenshields were sitting in the den and were arrested. Mrs. Youtz was found in the master bedroom but was not arrested that night. The Youtzes' nine-year-old daughter was sleeping in her own room. After the three men were arrested, five police officers searched the house for approximately two hours. The scope of that search is also raised as an issue in this case and would be a particular cause for concern were it not for this court's finding upon the issue of the entry itself. "An arrest within a home does not provide a license for the police to search the entire residence for evidence." United States v. Satterfield, 743 F.2d 827, 845 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1117, 105 S.Ct. 2362, 86 L.Ed.2d 262 (1985). United States v. Alfonso, 759 F.2d 728, 742 (9th Cir.1985).
Officer Smith candidly admitted the only purpose in going to the defendants' residence was to arrest Mr. Youtz. There was never any attempt made to obtain either a search warrant or an arrest warrant.
Mrs. Youtz was not arrested the night of the raid but "turned herself in" at the police station after having been telephoned by the police one week later.
In denying the defendants' motion to suppress, the trial judge stated his reasons for the record. A portion of his comments follow:
After concluding that the warrantless arrests and searches were proper, the trial judge stated:
"[M]ore than mere probable cause must be present to justify a warrantless entry of a private residence to arrest" or to search. People v. Wilson, 86 Ill.App.3d 637, 42 Ill.Dec. 279, 282, 408 N.E.2d 988, 991 (1980). In the absence of exigent circumstances, the authority to make a warrantless arrest ends at the threshold of a private dwelling and the police may not make a warrantless, nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home to effectuate a routine felony arrest. Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 576, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 1374-75, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980). See also Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 205-06, 101 S.Ct. 1642, 1644-45, 68 L.Ed.2d 38 (1981) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McLemore v. State
...valid contention exists that the State did not carry its burden of proving the reasonableness of a warrantless arrest. Youtz v. State, 494 So.2d 189, 193 (Ala.Cr.App.1986). Under these circumstances, we think the most prudent course is to remand this cause to the trial court with instructio......
-
State v. Clayton (Ex parte State)
...when the inevitable delay incident to obtaining a warrant must give way to an urgent need for immediate action. ’ ” Youtz v. State, 494 So.2d 189, 193 (Ala.Crim.App.1986) (quoting United States v. Satterfield, 743 F.2d 827, 844 (11th Cir.1984) ).“The burden rests on the State to prove the e......
-
State v. Lee
...States v. Rubin, 474 F.2d 262, 268-69 (3rd Cir. 1973) (citations omitted). See also 2 Search at pp. 439-450.""'Youtz v. State, 494 So. 2d 189, 193-94 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986).'"Cameron [v. State, 861 So. 2d [1145] at 1151-52 [(Ala. Crim. App. 2003)]."Williams, 995 So. 2d at 918. In Cameron v.......
-
Cameron v. State
...United States v. Rubin, 474 F.2d 262, 268-69 (3rd Cir.1973) (citations omitted). See also 2 Search at pp. 439-450." Youtz v. State, 494 So.2d 189, 193-94 (Ala. Crim.App.1986). In this case, as discussed above, Officer Watkins had probable cause to believe that there was marijuana in the res......