Supreme Court Rules On Admissibility Of Evidence

Obtained Pursuant To A Parole Search

Tuesday, August 7, 2018

The Tennessee Supreme Court has reversed part of a Court of Criminal Appeals’ decision suppressing evidence in a case involving individuals on supervised release and has affirmed the suppression of evidence against a third party who resided with them.    

Janet Stanfield, who was serving a community corrections sentence, Tony Winsett, who was on parole, and Janet Stanfield’s adult son, Justin Stanfield, lived together in a residence in Union City, Tennessee.  Justin Stanfield was not on any form of supervised release.  Acting upon information received from a confidential informant, law enforcement officers conducted a warrantless parole search of the residence based on Winsett’s parolee status.  Officers were aware that both Janet and Justin Stanfield resided with him. 

When officers arrived at the residence, they knocked on two doors, but the knocks went unanswered. Based upon observations made at the residence, officers entered through the front door of the residence, where they immediately detected a “very strong odor of marijuana.”  Officers noted three bedrooms with open doors and quickly ascertained which of the bedrooms belonged to whom.  Officers seized a weapon, ammunition, drug paraphernalia, and methamphetamine from the bedroom shared by Winsett and Janet Stanfield.  In Justin Stanfield’s bedroom, an officer found a jar that contained marijuana concealed inside a wooden television stand, as well as a weapon and ammunition. 

Meanwhile, officers noticed Justin Stanfield’s vehicle drive past the residence, and they left to conduct a traffic stop of his car.  At that time, Justin Stanfield provided information that led officers to another location to conduct an undercover narcotics transaction.  During the ensuing narcotics operation, Winsett and Janet Stanfield drove past.  Officers pursued the vehicle, and after a chase, the driver, Winsett, finally stopped.  A search of Janet Stanfield yielded four alprazolam tablets and currency. 

An Obion County Grand Jury jointly indicted Winsett and Janet Stanfield for drug and weapons offenses.  Winsett was indicted for attempting to elude a law enforcement officer.  Janet Stanfield and Justin Stanfield were separately indicted for drug offenses.  Prior to trial, defendants filed motions to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the warrantless search.  The trial court suppressed the evidence against all three defendants and dismissed the indictments.   The State appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals, which affirmed the rulings of the trial court.

The Tennessee Supreme Court granted the State’s application for permission to appeal in this case to consider the relative expectations of privacy enjoyed by individuals granted supervised release from incarceration—including those on parole, probation, community corrections, or someone residing with such an individual.    

The Court held that the parole search of Winsett was a “status” search based on his status as a parolee and was therefore permissible, notwithstanding a finding of probable cause or reasonable suspicion.  The fact that Winsett was not home at the time did not affect the constitutionality of the search.  Second, the search of Winsett’s/Janet Stanfield’s bedroom, including items that clearly belonged to her, was permissible pursuant to the doctrine of common authority, which represents an expansion of this doctrine to apply to status searches. 

Finally, also applying common authority, the Court held that the search of Justin Stanfield’s private bedroom was not encompassed by the doctrine, absent a showing of common access and usage by the other residents of the household.  Therefore, the Court reversed the Court of Criminal Appeals’ suppression of evidence against Winsett and Janet Stanfield and affirmed the suppression of evidence against Justin Stanfield. 

Justice Sharon G. Lee filed a separate opinion dissenting in part and concurring in the judgment of the Court. In her view, Mr. Winsett’s parolee status should not subject him, Ms. Stanfield, and her son, Justin Stanfield, to a warrantless and suspicionless search. Rather, she contends, Article I, section 7 of the Tennessee constitution requires the police to have reasonable suspicion before searching a parolee without a warrant. After reviewing the facts, Justice Lee concluded that the police did not have reasonable suspicion to search the Winsett/Stanfield home. Therefore, the evidence from the search should have been suppressed based on the violation of Mr. Winsett, Ms. Stanfield, and her son’s constitutional rights.

To read the majority opinion in State of Tennessee v. Janet Stanfield, authored by Justice Roger A. Page, and Justice Sharon G. Lee’s separate concurring and dissenting opinion, go to the opinions section of TNCourts.gov.


State Supreme Court Holds That Evidence Cannot Be Used To Contradict Written Words In Contract

Public Space Study Continues With Gehl's Visit

GDOL Keeping Up With Pace Of Federal Claims From Furloughed Workers


In a case closely watched by Tennessee’s business community, the Tennessee Supreme Court has held that trial courts cannot use evidence outside of the written agreement—called “extrinsic” evidence—to ... (click for more)

Gehl Studio, internationally recognized for their "people first" urban design work, will be making their third visit to Chattanooga. On Jan. 29 from 5:30-6:30 p.m., they'll be hosting an open ... (click for more)

The national story that aired on ABC Nightly News on Wednesday does not reflect the state of Georgia’s handling of unemployment insurance claims for furloughed federal workers. The network did ... (click for more)


Business

State Supreme Court Holds That Evidence Cannot Be Used To Contradict Written Words In Contract

In a case closely watched by Tennessee’s business community, the Tennessee Supreme Court has held that trial courts cannot use evidence outside of the written agreement—called “extrinsic” evidence—to interpret a contract if that evidence is used to contradict the contract’s written terms. Beginning in 1999, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, Inc., signed agency agreements with ... (click for more)

Public Space Study Continues With Gehl's Visit

Gehl Studio, internationally recognized for their "people first" urban design work, will be making their third visit to Chattanooga. On Jan. 29 from 5:30-6:30 p.m., they'll be hosting an open house at The Bessie Smith Cultural Center to seek input about people's experiences in public spaces downtown. The meeting is part of larger study to improve public spaces in the District. (click for more)

Breaking News

McNally Says New Governor Lee To Continue State's Success

Lt. Governor Randy McNally (R-Oak Ridge)said Saturday, following the inauguration of Governor Bill Lee by joint convention of the Tennessee General Assembly, that the new governor will continue the state's recent success. "Despite the weather in Nashville, today was a beautiful day in Tennessee. The inauguration of Bill Lee gave this state something not seen before in modern ... (click for more)

5 Arrested For Blocking Road During Women's Rally In Chattanooga

Five people were arrested during a Women's Rally in Chattanooga on Saturday. They were charged with obstructing a highway. They included Virginia Marie Moss, 57, of 981 Fairmount Ave. and Alaina Kailyn Cobb, 32, of 3615 Highland Terrace Dr. Also arrested was William Boyd Nix, 49, of 901 Siskin Dr. and Joel Ryan Willis, 52, of 5700 Roper St., East Ridge. Jean-Marie Lawrence, ... (click for more)

Opinion

Jim Morgan - My Coach And Neighbor

Upon Jim Morgan's death, my mind and heart flooded back to my memories of growing up in Chattanooga. I thought I would share my fond memories of such a great man. A few thoughts for one of the sweetest and finest men I ever knew: I remember Jim Morgan "Coach" not just as one of his wrestlers, but as a close family friend, teacher and neighbor. While Coach was my ... (click for more)

Roy Exum: The Saturday Funnies

It seems there has been quite an increase in calls from telemarketers and I asked my man Cleo if he had any idea how to stop them. “What works if you are male -- Telemarketer: "Hi, my name is Judy and I'm with XYZ Company." You wait for a second and, with a real husky voice, ask, "What are you wearing?" If you are a female try this: Cry out in surprise, "Judy? Is that you? Oh my ... (click for more)