Criminal Lawyer California

MICHAEL EUGENE JONES v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA
279 Va. 665
April 15, 2010, Decided

 Detective approached the vehicle and asked Jones for his driver’s license and vehicle registration while another Detective approached and spoke with the front-seat passenger. Jones did not produce his driver’s license or vehicle registration and was “visibly shaking and breathing hard.” The passenger provided his identification. After determining that the passenger had no warrants, and he was free to leave, and the passenger left.  Jones provided with a purported name and social security number.  During the pat down, Detective Deluca felt what he believed was a wallet. Detective Deluca testified that this “shocked” him because of Jones’ statement that he did not have any information or identification with him. Jones told Detective Deluca that the wallet belonged to his cousin. Detective Deluca placed Jones in “investigative detention,” handcuffed him, and placed him in the passenger side of the police vehicle. A search of Jones’ vehicle yielded two firearms and a substance that was subsequently identified as heroin.  Jones was indicted for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession with intent to distribute drugs (heroin), and possession of a firearm while possessing with intent to distribute heroin. Jones filed a motion to suppress all evidence resulting from what he contended was an unlawful seizure. The circuit court overruled Jones’ motion to suppress. After a bench trial, Jones was convicted of the offenses charged in the indictment.  Jones appealed his convictions to the Court of Appeals, which denied his petition by order, finding that the initial detention had not ended and that Jones’ consent to search was valid.

Issues:

Whether a lawful traffic stop transformed into an unlawful seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment when police seized the defendant’s wallet during a pat down, thereby rendering the defendant’s consent to search his vehicle invalid?

The court held that the “Detective was not justified in seizing Jones’ wallet because he believed the item he seized was a wallet and not a weapon or contraband. Based upon Detective’s testimony, we conclude that Detective did not have probable cause to retrieve the wallet from Jones’ possession. Additionally, the record shows that Detective asked Jones whether he could “look at the wallet,” but the record does not show that Jones responded verbally or in any other way to this request. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, we cannot conclude that Jones consented to the seizure of his wallet. Therefore, the seizure of Jones’ wallet by the detectives was in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights.  Although the seizure of Jones’ wallet was unlawful, Jones’ detention remained lawful because at the time of the seizure the detectives were still trying to ascertain Jones’ identity, which was within the scope of the traffic stop. Because Jones was lawfully detained at the time he consented to the search of his vehicle, his consent was not the result of an illegal detention and remained valid.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group.  They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions.  The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.

Originally published here.

The SRIS Law Group is a law firm with offices in Virginia, Maryland & Massachusetts.  The law firm assists clients with criminal/traffic defense, family law, immigration, civil litigation, bankruptcy, federal crimes & military law.  The law firm has Virginia offices in Fairfax County, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Loudoun County, Prince William County & Fredericksburg, Virginia.  The Maryland offices are in Montgomery County & Baltimore.  The Massachusetts offices are in Boston & Cambridge.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.