You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

State v. Cannon

Citations: 329 S.C. 163; 495 S.E.2d 218; 1997 S.C. App. LEXIS 163Docket: No. 2759

Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina; December 7, 1997; South Carolina; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case concerns an appeal by an individual convicted of possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute. The conviction arose from evidence obtained during a warrantless search following the appellant's arrest for criminal domestic violence after a complaint by his mother. The appellant argued that the evidence should have been suppressed under S.C.Code Ann. 16-25-70(G), which prohibits the use of evidence unrelated to domestic violence violations obtained during such searches. The court agreed, holding that the crack cocaine found was unrelated to the domestic violence charge and was therefore inadmissible. The State's contention that the evidence was valid due to the officers being invited into the home was dismissed, as the court clarified that the legality of the arrest hinges on statutory requirements, not the method of entry. The court ruled that nonexigent arrests in one's home necessitate a warrant, which was absent in this case. Consequently, the conviction was reversed and the case remanded. The decision was reached without oral argument, in accordance with Rule 215, SCACR, with Justices Hearn and Stilwell concurring.

Legal Issues Addressed

Requirement of a Warrant for Nonexigent Home Arrests

Application: The court emphasized that a warrant is necessary for nonexigent arrests within one's home under the statutory framework.

Reasoning: The court emphasized that the arrest must align with the statutory framework, which requires a warrant for nonexigent arrests in one's home.

Statutory Authority for Domestic Violence Arrests

Application: The court held that the legality of the arrest must be evaluated based on statutory authority, not the method of entry into the home.

Reasoning: The State's argument that the search was valid because the officers were invited into the home was rejected, as the legality of the arrest should be assessed based on the statutory authority granted for domestic violence arrests, not the entry method.

Warrantless Search and Seizure under Domestic Violence Arrest

Application: The court determined that evidence obtained during a warrantless search following a domestic violence arrest must be related to the offense to be admissible.

Reasoning: Cannon's appeal is based on S.C.Code Ann. 16-25-70(G), which mandates that evidence unrelated to violations of the domestic violence statute discovered during a warrantless search is inadmissible.