Brown v. State

770 A.2d 679, 364 Md. 37, 2001 Md. LEXIS 142
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedApril 17, 2001
Docket73, Sept. Term, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 770 A.2d 679 (Brown v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brown v. State, 770 A.2d 679, 364 Md. 37, 2001 Md. LEXIS 142 (Md. 2001).

Opinions

RAKER, Judge.

The central issue in this appeal is whether the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County erred in refusing to suppress evidence obtained from a car that was located and seized in Washington, D.C., transported to Maryland, and searched by police pursuant to a Prince George’s County search warrant, where the removal of the car from the District of Columbia was done without the owner’s permission or the cooperation of Washington, D.C. authorities. As we find that any error in admitting the evidence obtained from the car would be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, we do not reach the question of whether the admission of such evidence was error.

[39]*39I.

On February 26, 1997, Petitioner, Antwaun Brown, was at a gas station with Donovan Strickland and Anthony Crawley when they observed Oliver Smith, an off-duty Washington, D.C. police officer, arrive in a red car. They followed him to a parking lot in his apartment complex in Forestville, Maryland. Strickland and Crawley exited their vehicle, while Petitioner remained in the car. Strickland was carrying a handgun. Strickland approached Officer Smith and ordered him to lie on the ground, which Officer Smith did. Crawley searched Officer Smith, and he removed a pistol and approximately one hundred dollars in cash from him. While searching officer Smith, Strickland discovered his badge, realized that he was a police officer, and alerted his companions. Petitioner then left the car and approached the other men. Strickland handed Petitioner the handgun, and Petitioner shot Officer Smith in the head three times. Officer Smith died as a result of the gunshot wounds.

On February 28, 1997, Petitioner was arrested and charged with first degree murder and related offenses. At the time of his arrest, Petitioner was driving a burgundy Oldsmobile registered in his name. The Oldsmobile was brought to the Prince George’s County police evidence bay where it was searched pursuant to a valid search warrant.

After Petitioner’s arrest, the police discovered that he owned a second vehicle, a silver Cadillac. A police officer went to Petitioner’s residence in Landover, Maryland and discovered the Cadillac parked in front of the home. The officer obtained search warrants for Petitioner’s home and the Cadillac. When the police arrived at Petitioner’s home to conduct the searches, however, the Cadillac was gone. During their search of the home, Petitioner’s mother informed them that the Cadillac had been driven to the 800 block of Barnaby Place in southeast Washington, D.C.

The Prince George’s County police located the Cadillac in Washington, D.C. and had it towed to the Prince George’s County police headquarters in Landover, Maryland, where it [40]*40was searched pursuant to the warrant. They recovered a blue nylon bag containing a .32 caliber handgun and ammunition from the trunk of the Cadillac. The handgun was later identified as the murder weapon.

After his arrest, Petitioner was questioned by the police, eventually admitting that he shot Officer Smith but asserting that the shooting was an accident and that he was intoxicated at the time.

Petitioner filed a pretrial motion in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County to suppress the evidence seized from the Cadillac, arguing that the police exceeded the scope of their authority in retrieving the Cadillac from the District of Columbia. The court denied the motion to suppress on the grounds that the police were acting as private citizens when they were in the District of Columbia and that the search was permissible because it did not occur until the vehicle was back in Maryland.

Petitioner proceeded to trial in March 1998, but that trial resulted in a mistrial because the jury was unable to. reach a unanimous verdict. A second trial was held on September 28, 1998 through October 5, 1998, and Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder, robbery with a deadly weapon, robbery, unlawful use of a handgun, and two counts of conspiracy to commit robbery. He was sentenced to a term of confinement of life without the possibility of parole for the murder charge, as well as terms of confinement for a total of sixty years for the robbery and handgun offenses, to be served consecutively.

Petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal in the Court of Special Appeals, which affirmed his convictions. See Brown v. State, 132 Md.App. 250, 752 A.2d 620 (2000). The court held that the seizure of the car was not unreasonable, even though the search warrant was not valid in the District of Columbia, because the police had probable cause to believe that the Cadillac contained evidence of the crime, as evidenced by the search warrant, and because of the exigency of the situation, given that the car was readily mobile and had been moved out of the jurisdiction while Petitioner was in police custody.

[41]*41We granted certiorari to determine whether the trial court erred in refusing to suppress evidence seized from the Cadillac after the car had been seized in the District of Columbia and transported to Maryland, without the permission of the owner or the cooperation of the Washington, D.C. authorities, and searched pursuant to a warrant issued by a Prince George’s County court.

II. Seizure of the Car and Resulting Evidence

The evidence of Petitioner’s guilt in this case was overwhelming. In an interview with the police while he was in custody, Petitioner admitted to police that he was the one who pulled the trigger, but, in a written statement, asserted that it had been an accident, that he had been standing over Officer Smith with the gun in his hand, getting ready to leave, when Officer Smith had grabbed his leg, and the gun had gone off. Petitioner’s defense at trial was that the shooting of Officer Smith was an accident. Petitioner contends that, without the handgun that was seized from the Cadillac and the results of the firearms examination that was performed on it, the State would not have been able to prove that the gun did not discharge accidentally, thereby directly refuting Petitioner’s accident defense. We disagree.

Both the testimony of Anthony Crawley, one of Petitioner’s accomplices who witnessed the murder, and the uncontroverted forensic evidence regarding the fatal gunshot wounds directly refuted Petitioner’s claim that the shooting was an accident. Crawley testified that he saw Strickland hand Petitioner the gun and that Petitioner walked over to Officer Smith. Crawley testified that Petitioner was standing over Officer Smith, holding the gun to his head. He testified that he heard a shot, looked back over to where Petitioner and Officer Smith were, and saw the flash of two more shots, after which Petitioner ran back to the car and got in.

Even more damning to Petitioner’s accident defense was the unchallenged forensic evidence introduced at trial. Dr. Dennis Chute, a forensic pathologist, was the Assistant Medical Examiner for the State of Maryland who performed the [42]*42autopsy on Officer Smith. Dr. Chute testified that Officer Smith died as the result of three gunshot wounds to the head. Two were located at the back of the head — one in the middle and the other a little higher up the back of Officer Smith’s head. The third gunshot wound was located behind his right ear, about four inches below the top of his head. Dr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Herring v. State
16 A.3d 246 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2011)
Diallo v. State
972 A.2d 917 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2009)
Muhammad v. State
934 A.2d 1059 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2007)
State v. Cabral
859 A.2d 285 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2004)
Brown v. State
837 A.2d 956 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2003)
Bernadyn v. State
831 A.2d 532 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2003)
State v. Lee
821 A.2d 922 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2003)
Pantazes v. State
785 A.2d 865 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2001)
Crosby v. State
784 A.2d 1102 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2001)
Brown v. State
770 A.2d 679 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
770 A.2d 679, 364 Md. 37, 2001 Md. LEXIS 142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-state-md-2001.