Jaramillo v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-01708-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-06-2007 Opinion Author: MYERS, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of cocaine with intent to distribute - Motion to suppress - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C. J., LEE, P.J., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): ROBERTS, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-22-2005 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF COCAINE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF TWENTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MDOC, ORDERED TO PAY $300 RESTITUTION, AND FINED $50,000. District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: 037-05 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | AUGUSTINE JARAMILLO, JR. A/K/A AUGUSTIN JARAMILLO, JR. |
CRAIG A. CONWAY |
||
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Possession of cocaine with intent to distribute - Motion to suppress - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Augustine Jaramillo was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and the lesser-included charge of possession of cocaine. He was sentenced to twenty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Motion to suppress Jaramillo argues that law enforcement officials obtained the cocaine through an illegal, warrantless dog sniff search of the truck without consent or probable cause. The police officers testified without contradiction that Jaramillo gave free and voluntary consent to search his vehicle. Even without reasonable, articulable suspicion, the performance of a dog sniff of the outside of a vehicle by a trained canine during a routine, valid traffic stop is not a violation of one’s Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Had the traffic stop been prolonged unreasonably for the purpose of a canine sniff, Jaramillo may have been able to challenge the constitutionality. Notwithstanding the uncontested fact that Jaramillo consented to the search of his vehicle during the traffic stop, the use of narcotics-detection dogs during a stop based on probable cause did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence There was sufficient evidence to find Jaramillo guilty. The State’s evidence consisted of several exhibits entered into evidence, as well as included testimony from officers, agents, and a forensic scientist. The officers testified as to their involvement in discovering the cocaine hidden in the vehicle driven by Jaramillo. The agents testified as to their involvement in the processing of the case against Jaramillo. The forensic scientist testified as to the compilation of the substances found to be cocaine that were discovered in Jaramillo’s vehicle. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
