Smith v. State, CR-13-913

2014 Ark. App. 289

STEVEN J. SMITH APPELLANT v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE

No. CR-13-913

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV

Opinion Delivered May 7, 2014

APPEAL FROM THE BOONE

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CR-2013-2-4]

HONORABLE GORDON WEBB,

JUDGE

AFFIRMED

PHILLIP T. WHITEAKER, Judge

Appellant Steven J. Smith appeals from his conditional plea of guilty to the charges of manufacturing a controlled substance (methamphetamine) and possession of drug paraphernalia. His plea was conditioned upon an appeal challenging the circuit court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of his residence and his subsequent statements to the police. We affirm.

In September 2012, the Boone County Sheriff's Office received a phone call from a purported kidnapping victim. The victim reported that she and her boyfriend had been kidnapped. She identified her kidnappers by name and directed law enforcement to her location. The GPS on the victim's phone confirmed the location at a house on Erbie Cutoff Road.When officers arrived at the location, they found the kidnapping victims inside a vehicle parked outside a residence owned by Smith. Smith had not been named as one of the kidnappers; however, one of the alleged kidnappers, who was known to the officers by sight, was observed standing outside the Smith residence near the vehicle. Upon the arrival of the police, the kidnapping suspect ran into the Smith residence.

The SWAT team was assembled and made an attempt to get the suspect to come out of the residence. When that attempt failed, the SWAT team entered the residence to retrieve the suspect. They entered the home through the back door, which opened into the kitchen area of the house. Upon entry into the kitchen, law enforcement observed, in a sink and in a black bag, items used in manufacturing methamphetamine.

The kidnapping suspects were taken into custody. Smith was also taken into custody based upon probable cause for possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture. Law enforcement obtained a warrant, returned to the home, and seized the items. Smith then gave a statement to police after being advised of his rights. Based on the foregoing, Smith was charged as a habitual offender with manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia.

Smith subsequently filed a motion to suppress all evidence obtained from the warrantless search of his home, all evidence obtained from the execution of the search warrant at his home, and all statements made subsequent to the discovery of said evidence. The trial court denied the motion. Smith entered into a conditional plea, reserving his right to challenge the search on appeal.

In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence, this court conducts a de novo review based upon the totality of the circumstances, reversing only if the circuit court's ruling is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Freeman v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 144, 391 S.W.3d 682. Any conflicts in the testimony are for the circuit court to resolve because it is in a superior position to determine the credibility of the witnesses. Id. The plain-view doctrine may be used to uphold a warrantless seizure of items where, first, the officers were lawfully located in a place to plainly view the...