Can Utah police search your home based on drugs found in your trash? State v. Revuelta Explained

In State v. Revuelta, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether law enforcement’s discovery of drugs and drug paraphernalia in a defendant’s curbside trash provided sufficient probable cause to obtain a search warrant for her residence.

Background and Facts

Acting on an anonymous tip, Utah County officers conducted surveillance on Revuelta’s North Salt Lake home. They observed that she remained home during typical work hours, had surveillance cameras, and possessed vehicles with out-of-state plates and temporary tags. When officers conducted a trash pull on collection day, they discovered a glass jar containing “high grade marijuana” with significant residue, a pen used for smoking illegal substances, and correspondence addressed to Revuelta. Five days later, officers obtained a search warrant based on this evidence, which was executed nine days after issuance. The search uncovered over ten pounds of methamphetamine, substantial cash, weapons, and other drugs in a home where Revuelta’s young children were present.

Key Legal Issues

Revuelta challenged the search warrant on two grounds: first, that the affidavit failed to establish probable cause on its face, and second, that any probable cause had grown stale during the fourteen-day period between the trash pull and warrant execution. The court applied a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis to determine whether the magistrate had a substantial basis for finding probable cause.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the suppression motion, relying heavily on State v. Jackson, which involved similar trash pull evidence. The court found that marijuana and drug paraphernalia discovered alongside personal correspondence created a sufficient nexus between the contraband and Revuelta’s residence. The court rejected arguments that unknown persons could have placed the items in the trash, noting that the correspondence and corroborating surveillance observations supported the inference that the drugs originated from within the home. Regarding staleness, the court applied State v. Ranquist and concluded that fourteen days between trash pull and warrant execution did not invalidate the probable cause, particularly given the nature of ongoing drug activity.

Practice Implications

This decision reinforces that trash pull evidence remains a powerful law enforcement tool in Utah. Defense practitioners should focus on challenging the nexus between contraband found in trash and the targeted residence, particularly when personal identifying materials are absent. The court’s analysis suggests that even marginal corroborating evidence—such as basic surveillance observations—can strengthen probable cause determinations. The fourteen-day timeframe approved here provides guidance on staleness challenges, though practitioners should still argue for prompt warrant execution in drug cases given the consumable nature of contraband.