This seems to me to be a terrible opinion for several reasons. First, it neglects to mention that the defendant could have prevented the police from continuing to tase him simply by complying with their demand that he spit out the cocaine - he chose to get tased rather than give up the goods. Second, what option did this leave for the police - take an officer's valuable time for 6, 12, 24 hours watching him to make sure he didn't dispose of the evidence somehow?
Even more troubling is the way the majority opinion cavalierly decided to ignore the trial court's findings, simply because there was countervailing evidence. Does this mean that any factfinding based on an issue that was contested may be summarily thrown out by the appellate court?
Someone needs to run against Judge Johnson when her term is up.

Only Judge Keller dissented, and she didn't write an opinion. So, whether you like Judge Johnson or not, she did reach a decision that received the support of all but one judge on the CCA.

The circumstances were special and are unlikely to be repeated anytime soon. In addition, the notion of repeatedly shocking someone with electricity in order to recover some drugs might be itself shocking, constitutionally speaking, to a reasonable person.

Besides - the guy swallowing "suspected cocaine" is tampering with physical evidence - a greater charge than possession (unless he's eating a LOT). You don't have to prove the substance was cocaine, meth, or whatever. It could be tic-tacs. I say let him chew away........

Oh, I forgot to mention - the cop was tasering him in the groin area.