Opinion

Darrin Keith Brown v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Mar 18, 2004
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 35.2%

The opinion

Opinion issued March 18, 2004

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

NO. 01-03-00067-CR

DARRIN KEITH BROWN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 897761

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant Darrin Keith Brown guilty of possession of between

four and 20 grams cocaine, and assessed punishment at 33 years’ confinement. We

affirm.

Facts

On December 27, 2001, Sergeant Richard Klotz and Officer Stanley Shuman

drove to the Taft Motel, a location known for narcotics transactions. Sergeant Klotz

observed a woman standing by the driver’s side of a car talking to Brown, who was

seated inside the car. Based on his specialized narcotics investigations training and

his 33 years of police experience, Officer Klotz formed the opinion that a drug or

prostitution transaction was taking place. He approached the car, and the woman

moved away.

Officer Klotz then observed Brown holding a yellow-orange prescription bottle

in his hand. He recognized it as a type commonly used in the drug trade to store and

conceal cocaine. Upon seeing Klotz, Brown dove over the back seat of the car to the

floorboard. Fearing that Brown might be reaching for a gun, Officer Klotz drew his

weapon and ordered Brown to exit the car. Brown complied, but then turned and fled

on foot. Other officers on the scene apprehended Brown.

Officer Shuman retrieved the prescription bottle from the floorboard of the

backseat. He also seized a plastic twist bag containing cocaine.

Motion to Suppress

In his sole issue, Brown contends that the trial court erred in denying his

motion to suppress evidence of the cocaine because the police retrieved it pursuant

to an unlawful search of a vehicle.

An exception to the Fourth Amendment prohibition against warrantless

searches is a search incident to a lawful arrest. New York v. Belton , 453 U.S. 454,

460 , 101 S. Ct. 2860, 2864 (1981). By fleeing the scene and evading detention,

Brown committed a criminal offense in Klotz’s presence. See Simpson v. State , 668

S.W.2d 915, 918 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, no pet.). Officer Shuman’s

contemporaneous search of the vehicle was incident to a lawful custodial arrest and

thus constituted a proper search. The police may search a vehicle and containers

within it when the search is incident to a lawful arrest. See Belton , 453 U.S. at 460 ,

101 S. Ct. at 2864 ; Carver v. State , 746 S.W.2d 869, 871 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th

Dist.] 1988, pet. ref’d). The trial court therefore properly denied the motion to

suppress.

Brown relies on Smith v. State , 759 S.W.2d 163 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th

Dist.] 1988, pet. ref’d) to support his contention that the search was invalid. In Smith ,

however, the court held that an inventory search of a vehicle in connection with its

impoundment was improper as it took place after an unlawful detention and search.

Id. at 167 . Here, the police searched the vehicle in connection with a lawful arrest.

Brown’s reliance upon Smith is therefore misplaced.

Conclusion

The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress, and we therefore affirm

the judgment.

Jane Bland

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Keyes, and Bland.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2( b) .

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.