## Facts

- Police investigated a cocaine-distribution conspiracy operating from Room 136 at the Venice Motel near Hagerstown, Maryland.
- John M. Holland was arrested in downtown Hagerstown around 10:00 p.m. on July 16, 1997, and booked into the Washington County Detention Center by about 10:45 p.m.
- During booking, Holland’s personal property was taken and stored by detention-center personnel.
- After Holland’s booking, police interviewed a co-conspirator and learned that a conspirator had possessed a key to Room 136.
- Officers then searched Holland’s stored booking property and found a key to Room 136, which the State used as evidence linking him to the motel room.
- At trial, the State also presented testimony recounting statements made in the motel room that participants were going “down to the strip to sell,” referring to an area associated with drug sales.
- A Washington County jury convicted Holland of conspiracy to distribute cocaine.

## Issues

1. Whether retrieving and examining a motel-room key from an arrestee’s stored booking property hours after arrest was an unreasonable warrantless search under the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether testimony repeating statements made in the motel room (including “going down to the strip to sell”) was inadmissible hearsay.
3. Whether the sentence imposed for conspiracy to distribute cocaine was an illegal sentence under Maryland law.

## Decision

- The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held the delayed search of Holland’s stored property and seizure of the motel key was a permissible search incident to a lawful arrest under United States v. Edwards.
- The court held the challenged statements were properly admitted as co-conspirator statements made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy and/or as non-hearsay offered to show the conspiracy’s existence and operation.
- The court held the sentence was not illegal because it was within statutory limits and lacked any fundamental defect rendering it unlawful.

## Legal Principles

- A search incident to lawful custodial arrest may be conducted later at the place of detention on items taken from the arrestee and held during continuing custody; contemporaneity with the arrest is not required.
- When police could have searched an item at the time of arrest, the Fourth Amendment permits conducting that search later during processing or detention, without a warrant, as part of the same custodial arrest context.
- Statements of a co-conspirator made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy are admissible against other conspirators once there is independent evidence of the conspiracy and the defendant’s connection to it.
- A sentence is not “illegal” merely because it is challenged; illegality requires a sentence beyond statutory authority or a comparable fundamental defect.

## Conclusion

The appellate court upheld the warrantless retrieval of a motel key from an arrestee’s stored jail property as a valid delayed search incident to arrest, approved admission of co-conspirator statements describing ongoing drug sales, and rejected an illegal-sentence claim where the punishment remained within statutory bounds.


Holland v. State, 713 A.2d 364 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1998)