Cribbs v. State

2020 Ark. App. 539

612 S.W.3d 775

James D. CRIBBS, Appellant

v.STATE of Arkansas, Appellee

No. CR-19-51

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, DIVISION I.

Opinion Delivered December 2, 2020

Josh Q. Hurst, for appellant.

Leslie Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Karen Virginia Wallace, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.

BART F. VIRDEN, Judge

James Cribbs appeals the sentencing orders entered by the Pulaski County Circuit Court in case No. CR-2016-3944, wherein he was convicted of fleeing and possession of heroin with the purpose to deliver, and in case No. CR-2016-3964, wherein he was convicted of possession of heroin with the purpose to deliver, possession of hydrocodone, and possession of marijuana. On appeal, Cribbs argues that the circuit court clearly erred in denying the motion to suppress he filed in case No. CR-2016-3944 because the police officer who initiated the traffic stop lacked probable cause. Cribbs also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction of possession of heroin with the purpose to deliver in case No. CR-2016-3964. We affirm.

On October 23, 2017, the circuit court held a hearing on Cribbs's motion to suppress in case No. CR-2016-3944. At the hearing, North Little Rock police officer Ryan Davidson testified that on September 15, 2016, he was working on a special unit that focuses on dealing with gang members, drug dealers, and violent offenders. Davidson said that while working in the same area with fellow officer Jeffery Elenbaas, he (Davidson) received a radio communication from Elenbaas reporting that he had observed a silver Chevrolet Impala traveling on 34th Street turn south onto Chandler Street without using a turn signal. Davidson stated that he saw the silver Impala as it turned from Chandler Street to 33rd Street. Davidson said he followed the Impala, turned on his blue lights, and tried to initiate a traffic stop based on the information provided to him by Elenbaas. However, the Impala sped away. Davidson turned on his siren and chased the Impala through a business area, but when the Impala turned into a residential area, Davidson discontinued his pursuit. Several blocks away Davidson saw a billow of white smoke coming from the now stopped Impala. As Davidson approached, he witnessed the driver of the Impala (later identified as Cribbs) jump out and run away. Davidson ran after Cribbs. Davidson saw Cribbs fall, pick something up, and try to conceal it. Davidson ordered Cripps to stop and grabbed him. Cribbs pulled away and continued to conceal something, so Davidson deployed his Taser on Cribbs twice, after which Cribbs complied with Davidson's orders. Davidson stated that other officers arrived, and they were able to arrest Cribbs. Davidson said he watched as a plastic baggie filled with 117 capsules was pulled out of Cribbs's mouth.¹

Officer Jeffery Elenbaas of the North Little Rock Police Department testified that on September 15, he was surveilling a house known for narcotics activity. He said he watched a silver Impala at the house he was surveilling pull out of the yard, travel down 34th Street, and turn southbound onto Chandler Street without using a turn signal. Elenbaas testified that Davidson was closer to the Impala, so he radioed Davidson and reported the traffic violation. When Elenbaas arrived at the scene, he observed Cribbs expel the baggie of capsules from his mouth.

Following the testimony of Davidson and Elenbaas, Cribbs argued that the circuit court should grant his motion to suppress the heroin capsules found on Cribbs because Davidson did not have probable cause to stop Cribbs's vehicle. Specifically, Cribbs argued that Davidson, who initiated the stop, had no firsthand knowledge of the alleged traffic violation. Rather, all of Davidson's knowledge came from Elenbaas—a third-party. Cribbs contended that it is not proper for an officer to make a probable-cause determination based on events that took place outside of his presence.

The circuit court denied the motion to suppress in case No. CR-2016-3944 and proceeded with a bench trial in cases Nos. CR-2016-3944 and CR-2016-3964. The bench trial included the previously summarized suppression-hearing testimony along with new testimony. Elenbaas testified that on September 9, 2016, he was patrolling in downtown North Little Rock when he observed a tan Mercedes-Benz driving left of center. He tried to initiate a traffic stop, but the driver of the Mercedes fled onto the interstate. As the Mercedes sped away from Elenbaas, he was able to see its license-plate number, which was provided to other North Little Rock police officers.

Officer Scott Harton of the North Little Rock Police Department testified that he found the Mercedes at 12:30 a.m. on September 10 at a dead end on Young Road. Harton stated that the engine was running and that there were two people in the vehicle: Cribbs in the driver's seat, and Portia Wine in the rear passenger seat. After Harton ordered them out of the car, Wine told Harton that she had a baggie of capsules in her vagina, and she gave it to him.² Harton said that Wine also advised him that there was marijuana³ in the back-seat passenger-side-door compartment.

Officer Flippin of the North Little Rock Police Department testified that he assisted Harton and North Little Rock police sergeant John Lyon with the arrest of Cribbs and Wine on September 10. Flippin testified that when he patted Cribbs down, he found three pills in the left front pocket of Cribbs's pants.⁴ Sergeant Lyon testified that an inventory search of Cribbs's vehicle was conducted after his arrest. Lyon stated that he found two prescription medicine bottles in the trunk.⁵

Wine, a codefendant in case No. CR-2016-3964, testified that on September 10, Cribbs picked her up at her home, and they went to a dead-end road in North Little Rock to have sex. She stated that they were in the back seat of the car when the police pulled up, at which time she said Cribbs jumped into the front seat, threw a baggie in her lap, and told her to put it in her "private," which she did because she was scared. She testified that she thought the baggie contained marijuana. She said that the police officers told her that Cribbs said the drugs were hers, but she denied this.

At the conclusion of the bench trial, the circuit court found Cribbs guilty in case No. CR-2016-3944 of possession of heroin with the purpose to deliver and misdemeanor fleeing and sentenced him to concurrent sentences of ten years’ imprisonment for the felony and one year in jail for the misdemeanor. The court also found Cribbs guilty in case No. CR-2016-3964 of possession of heroin with the purpose to deliver, possession of hydrocodone, and misdemeanor possession of marijuana and sentenced him to concurrent sentences of five years’ imprisonment for each of the felony convictions and one year of probation for the misdemeanor conviction. This appeal followed.

For his first point on appeal, Cribbs argues that the circuit court clearly erred in denying his motion to suppress in case No. CR-2016-3944. In reviewing the circuit court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence, we conduct a de novo review based on the totality of the circumstances, reviewing findings of historical facts for clear error and determining whether those facts give rise to reasonable suspicion or probable cause, giving due weight to inferences drawn by the circuit court. Sims v. State , 356 Ark. 507, 511–12, 157 S.W.3d 530, 533 (2004).

On appeal, Cribbs argues that Davidson lacked probable cause to initiate the traffic stop because he did not personally witness Cribbs's traffic violation; therefore, the traffic stop Davidson initiated was invalid, and the drugs found thereafter should have been suppressed. In support of this argument, Cribbs cites Rounds v. State , 2018 Ark. App. 267, 550 S.W.3d 403. In Rounds , the appellant was stopped by a police sergeant who had been told by another officer that the appellant might have an active warrant. The other officer had heard from a bystander at the scene of the attempted robbery of the appellant two days prior that appellant might have an active warrant, and the officer never determined whether the appellant actually had a warrant. Id. at 5, 550 S.W.3d at 406. Our court held that the sergeant lacked reasonable suspicion that the appellant was involved in criminal activity, and without reasonable suspicion to support the stop, the circuit court clearly erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress. Id. at 10–11, 550 S.W.3d at 409.

Cribbs's reliance on Rounds is misplaced. First, Rounds was based on an Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.1 reasonable-suspicion analysis and did not involve a traffic violation of any sort. Second, Rounds does not stand for the proposition that firsthand observations or information of one police officer cannot be imputed to another officer as argued by Cribbs. In Rounds , our court held that the sergeant did not have reasonable suspicion to stop the appellant on the basis of the inaccurate and unconfirmed information the sergeant received and relied on from another officer. When the officer relayed to the sergeant that the appellant had an active warrant, the officer did not know that this was true, and it was not. In contrast, in the case at bar, when Elenbaas relayed to Davidson that Cribbs had committed a traffic violation, Elenbaas knew it to be true because he had personally witnessed it.

In order for a police officer to make a traffic stop, the officer must have probable cause to believe that the vehicle has violated a traffic law. Sims , 356 Ark. at 512, 157 S.W.3d at 533. Probable cause is defined as facts or circumstances within a police officer's knowledge that are sufficient to permit a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been committed by the person suspected. Laime v. State , 347 Ark. 142, 153, 60 S.W.3d 464, 472 (2001). In assessing the existence of probable cause, our review is...