Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
Table of Contents
State v. Siler, COA23-474, ___ N.C. App. ___ (Aug. 6, 2024)
In this Chatham County case, defendant appealed after pleading guilty to trafficking in opium or heroin by possession with a plea agreement to preserve his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment on the guilty plea, but vacated the judgment that revoked defendant’s probation, and remanded to the trial court for reconsideration.
In July of 2021, defendant was sitting in the passenger seat of a car parked at a gas station when a law enforcement officer pulled up next to him. The officer was in uniform and in a marked car; while the officer pumped gas into his vehicle, he observed defendant move an orange pill bottle from the center console to under his seat. Defendant then exited the vehicle, and the officer questioned him about the pill bottle. Defendant denied having any pills, but after further questioning, produced a different pill bottle, and told the officer the pills were Vicodin he received from a friend. The officer then searched the vehicle, finding the orange pill bottle, and lab testing later confirmed the pills were opioids. Unbeknownst to the officer, defendant was on probation during the encounter. The trial court revoked this probation after defendant’s guilty plea, even though defendant’s probationary period had expired, but the trial court did not make any findings of good cause.
Taking up the motion to suppress, the Court of Appeals first noted that the case presented an issue of first impression: “Is a search based on a standard less than probable cause (as authorized by the terms and conditions of probation) valid, where the officer performing the search is not aware that the target of his search is on probation?” Slip Op. at 3. However, the court declined to answer this question. Instead, the court concluded that “the evidence of the encounter up to just prior to the search of the vehicle was sufficient to give the officer probable cause to search the vehicle.” Id. at 8. Because defendant only pleaded guilty to the charge related to the orange pill bottle in the vehicle, the court avoided exploring the issues related to the Vicodin inside the other pill bottle that defendant offered after questioning.
The court then considered the revocation of defendant's probation, noting that the State conceded the trial court’s error in not making a “good cause” finding. The court noted that “there was sufficient evidence before the trial court from which that court could make the required finding” and remanded for reconsideration. Id. at 10.