Posted On: June 15, 2008 by Bobby G. Frederick

State v. Tindall - South Carolina Court of Appeals rejects Fourth Amendment in cocaine trafficking case

The Court of Appeals affirms Terry Tindall's conviction for trafficking cocaine > 400g. Tindall was stopped by Deputy Dale Colegrove in Oconee County and detained on the side of the road while his car was searched by law enforcement. Ultimately over 400 grams of cocaine was found hidden inside the back bumper of his car.

Law enforcement has the right to stop a car if there is reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred, and to briefly detain the car and its occupants long enough to write a ticket and to run a computer check of license and registration. Colegrove claimed that he stopped Tindall for speeding and for following too closely.

Once the purpose of the traffic stop has concluded, any further detention has to be justified by a reasonable, articulable suspicion that some further crime is occurring. If there is no articulable suspicion of further crime then any further detention is illegal and drugs or other contraband found will be inadmissible at trial. In Tindall's case, the Court of Appeals found reasonable suspicion for a continued detention because:

Colegrove testified he further detained Tindall because he believed something illegal was occurring based on Tindall’s actions after the stop. Colegrove observed numerous things after the stop including: 1) Tindall was nervous even after receiving the warning; 2) Tindall was driving a rental car that he had not rented; 3) Tindall was driving only one way and then dropping the car off; 4) Tindall planned on driving approximately eighteen hours in one day; and, 5) the cities involved were both “drug hubs.” We find evidence in the record to support a determination that Colegrove had a reasonable suspicion something illegal was occurring. Therefore, the search and seizure did not violate Tindall’s Fourth Amendment rights and the trial court did not err in admitting the cocaine.

Basically, in Oconee County, Dillon County, Florence County, and many other locations in South Carolina, if you appear nervous while an officer is asking you if you have drugs or weapons in your car, if you are driving a rental car, and if you are driving to and from any major city ("drug hub"), law enforcement can detain you on the side of the road and dismantle your vehicle as they search for drugs.

Although I did not represent him, I was at Tindall's trial and I recall the testimony. Colegrove made statements such as, he could see Tindall's heart beat and increased pulse (through Tindall's shirt). Colegrove received this amazing observational medical skill through advanced narcotics interdiction training (how to lie on the stand to obtain a conviction 101).

What really happens on the interstate in South Carolina is if you are Black or Hispanic and driving a rental car you will be pulled over. You will be told you are getting a warning ticket for following too closely (at trial, the officer will testify that this is an indicator of drug trafficking, because often one car with the drugs will follow a second car with the owner of the drugs).

Once the officer has run your license and tags, he will return to your car and give you a warning ticket, then he will proceed to ask more questions. Do you have any drugs or weapons in your car, do you mind if I search your car. They will search your car whether you mind or not. If drugs are found, at trial the officer will testify that you were nervous (note that experts like Colegrove can witness your heartbeat through your shirt - there is no escape from these superhero abilities), the officer will note that you were driving a rental car (1/2 of the reason he pulled you in the first place, the other silent 1/2 being the fact that you are Black or Hispanic), and the officer will note that you were traveling from a city to city (a drug hub to another drug hub, describing over 50% of all travelers on the interstate).

Another part of this equation is the fact that officers like Colegrove are a large source of income for the Counties. Each time that they find drugs in a car they take all money they find on the person or in the car, and sometimes the car, as a "forfeiture." If you can, imagine several "busts" a day and what the figure begins to add up to by the end of each year.

Officers like Dale Colegrove believe that the ends justify the means. I once asked a prosecutor in Dale Colegrove's jurisdiction if they did not see a problem with a Sheriff's Deputy sitting on the interstate and pulling over Hispanics and Blacks in rental cars. That prosecutor's response was, well, he gets convictions doesn't he?

The Court of Appeals may think, who cares if we hold a drug trafficker on the side of the road for 30 minutes while his car is searched? The answer is no-one. What we should care about is all of the people that are being humiliated on the side of the road that are not drug traffickers. What we should care about is the blatant racial profiling that is occurring in our state. We should care about a culture of law enforcement that encourages police perjury in order to obtain convictions. We should care that cases like Terry Tindall's send a message to law enforcement that the Fourth Amendment means nothing, so long as you are getting convictions and supplementing your County's income.

Bookmark and Share

Comments

I do believe in doing things by the letter. I also believe that you need to be there to know what is going on. Hopefully, you saw the video and heard the audio before doing this report.

It is not clear what you mean by your comment. But, I was present through Tindall's trial and watched the roadside video as well as heard the testimony in court, if that is your question.

When I practiced in Oconee County, I also handled several cases involving this same Sheriff's deputy. Since that time, in Horry County and the surrounding area, I have handled many drug cases that involve traffic stops.

There is more information on this subject in other posts on this blog as well, if you are interested.

Keep an eye on this case: Watty v. Clarendon County SC Sheriff's Office et al

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)