Pubdate: Fri, 02 Aug 2002
Source: Herald-Sun, The (Durham, NC)
Copyright: 2002 The Herald-Sun
Contact:  http://www.herald-sun.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1428
Author: John Stevenson, of The Herald Sun
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n1308/a07.html
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n1339/a01.html

JUDGE TOSSES OUT DRUG SEARCH OF APARTMENT

DURHAM -- For the second time in a month, a judge has declared a Durham 
police drug raid to be unconstitutional.

Superior Court Judge Ron Stephens, a former district attorney, ruled 
Thursday that police acted in a manner that was "not constitutional or 
permissible" when they searched a Trinity Avenue apartment in August 2001.

According to Stephens, officers entered the apartment without permission of 
the tenant and searched without her consent. A visitor let the officers in, 
but the visitor was not legally authorized to do so, Stephens said.

Officers conceded they had no search warrant, but they said leaseholder 
Kathy Renee Bunch game them permission to search -- something Bunch denied.

As a result of Stephens' ruling Thursday, two grams of crack cocaine seized 
in the search may not be used as evidence against Bunch.

Prosecutor Michael Moore said later that felony charges against Bunch would 
be dismissed. The charges accused her of possessing cocaine with the intent 
to sell and maintaining a house for drug sales.

"I've got to dismiss the charges," said Moore. "Without the evidence, I 
have nothing to go on."

But Moore defended the actions of police and said they did nothing wrong. 
He also said he believed officers did, in fact, have Bunch's consent to 
search her apartment.

Police spokesman Norman Blake, a lieutenant, said Thursday he was not 
familiar with the situation. "With that in mind, I am not in a position to 
comment one way or the other," he said.

Last month, Superior Court Judge Orlando F. Hudson ruled that a large 
police drug raid at Cheek Road Apartments in February was unconstitutional 
and partially illegal. Hudson found that officers improperly "seized" the 
entire neighborhood and conducted "unreasonable" searches and seizures 
while they were there.

Thirty-five arrests and 65 citations resulted from the Cheek Road raid, 
which involved more than 100 Durham officers, two National Guard 
helicopters, 10 State Bureau of Investigation agents and other 
law-enforcement resources.

Some residents complained that police were unnecessarily brutal, and that 
officers even tackled a 13-year-old boy and held a gun to his head for no 
apparent reason.

On the other hand, an unidentified resident said on television that she 
thought the raid was good because it might help rid her neighborhood of 
drugs and guns.

Police consistently maintained they did nothing wrong or unconstitutional.

After the raid was declared unconstitutional, court officials began 
dismissing charges against the suspects.

In the case decided Thursday, defense lawyer Lawrence Campbell said two 
officers approached Bunch's apartment for what they called a 
"knock-and-talk" visit. In other words, the officers indicated that they 
merely wanted to chat with Bunch about possible problems in the neighborhood.

The officers had received complaints about "people going in and out of the 
house" where Bunch lived, according to Campbell.

Even though Bunch said she did not want her apartment searched, the two 
officers went inside anyway and soon were followed by 10 or 12 other 
officers, Campbell said.

Bunch was told by a female officer that the officer did not have a search 
warrant, she testified.

"I said, 'You cannot search my apartment or me,' " Bunch added. "I kept 
repeating it constantly. Never did I say yes. I kept on saying, 'No, you 
cannot search me or my apartment.. She [the officer] kept on pressuring me. 
She said things like, 'We are the law and we can do it.'"

Campbell said later that "knock-and-talk" visits are potentially dangerous 
because officers have no guidelines on how to conduct them. For example, 
there is nothing about them in police general orders, he said.

"We're concerned that without direction, some officers are exceeding the 
scope of a consensual search," Campbell added.

Campbell also said police had no excuse for not asking Bunch to sign a 
consent-to-search document. A signed document would have eliminated all 
debate about whether the search was consensual, he said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Ariel