New Jersey DWI / DUI Lawyers
Law Offices of Thomas Carroll Blauvelt, LLC
Law Offices of Thomas Carroll Blauvelt, LLC
NJ Case Law - State v. Handy
Facts
On September 13, 2005, Officer Carlo Drogo and Anthony Sills stopped Handy for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk. Drogo called in to check whether Handy had any outstanding warrants. Handy told Drogo that his date of birth was “March 18, 1974," spelled his name as “Germaine Handy," and informed Drogo of his address on Broad Street in Millville. Drogo gave this information to the police dispatcher for the warrant check. The dispatcher told Drogo that there was a warrant for Handy's arrest. Drogo searched and arrested Handy. During the search incident to arrest, Drogo found crack cocaine and marijuana on Handy's person. After Handy was arrested and placed in the back of the police car, the dispatcher informed Drogo that there were discrepancies between the warrant and the information provided by Handy. The warrant had been issued for a “Jermaine O. Handy,” whose date of birth was given as March 14, 1972, and whose address was listed as being in Los Angeles, California. Handy pled guilty and was convicted for possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS) in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:35-10(a)(1).
Procedural History
Handy filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized incident to his arrest. At the suppression hearing, the motion judge denied Handy's motion found that even though the dispatcher acted unreasonably by warning Drogo of discrepancies immediately, Drogo acted reasonably under the circumstances.
The issue raised on appeal is whether the exclusionary rule should suppress the evidence when the unreasonable actions of a police dispatcher result in an unreasonable search or seizure?
Holding
The exclusionary rule applies to suppress the evidence when an unreasonable actions of a police dispatcher result in an unreasonable search or seizure.
Rationale
Unlike the court clerk error cases, this case involved a police dispatcher. The deterrent value of applying the exclusionary rule to the cases involving a police dispatcher is "quite significant" This is so because the police dispatcher is a "crucial link" between the officers and police headquarters. Unlike the clerks, the police dispatchers are involved in fighting crime.
Notes Reversed and Remanded.
Contact Us today for your free NJ DWI / DUI consultation.

