ENTERED JAN 3 0 2015' j ,.., ' :.'-''\\f
o·s 7 1 o Y ' /} tlxtM?~I- , .~~*·'
tr . . ~;"'·•·• J;,.V
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COVRf~t\ C.')Urts CUMBERLAND, ss CRIMINAL ACTION DOCKET NO. CR-14-6647 NDM--CMm~ 01-(5-15
STATE OF MAINE ZOlS JRN 21 PA 12 59 v. ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CLEMENTE ALVARADO,
Defendant
Heating on defendant's motion to suppress was held January 13, 2015.
Defendant argues his due process rights were violated and his statements were not
voluntary. For the following reasons, the motion is denied.
FACTS
Brunswick Police Department Detective Kenneth Bailey has served as School
Resource Officer for Brunswick High School for ten years. On 5/14/14, Amanda Faith
appeared at Detective Bailey's office with a friend and asked to speak to him.
During his investigation of the allegations, Detective Bailey took notes when
speaking to people and maintained an ongoing report on his computer. Detective
Bailey was unable to contact defendant for more than one month because defendant
was out of the state for work. Detective Bailey finally contacted defendant by phone
and said allegations had been made that should be discussed. Defendant agreed to go
to the police station to speak to Detective Bailey.
On July 1, 2014, a few days after the phone conversation, defendant arrived alone
at the police station just before 5:00p.m. Detective Bailey and defendant spoke in the
main lobby. Detective Bailey was in plain clothes. He did not recall whether he had a
weapon. He asked if defendant wanted to go to an interview room and defendant replied, "sure." They went to the interview room, which measures a few feet wide by a
few feet long. When Detective Bailey closed the door, he told defendant the door was
closed only for privacy and defendant was free to leave. The two sat approximately
three feet from each other. Although the Brunswick Police Department has the capacity
to record interviews, this interview was not recorded.
Detective Bailey told defendant Amanda had made allegations regarding
inappropriate conduct at a bowling alley, and the Detective wanted to talk about the
allegations. ·Detective Bailey read the Miranda warnings from the Brunswick Police
Department sheet. (State's Ex. A.) Defendant understood his rights and Detective
Bailey checked the boxes on the sheet, indicating defendant replied "yes" when asked if
he understood each paragraph. Defendant agreed to speak to Detective Bailey and
signed the sheet, as did Detective Bailey.
The conversation lasted ten to fifteen minutes. Detective Bailey asked what
happened. He then asked if defendant would prepare a written statement. The
Detective stated the statement did not have to be written at that time and defendant
could take the fonn with him. ·Defendant said he would be in contact when the
statement was completed. When the statement was not returned, Detective Bailey
called defendant. Defendant said he did not have time but he would complete the
statement. Detective Bailey never received the written statement.
Detective Bailey called defendant again and asked him to go to the police station.
At the station, Detective Bailey said he had enough information and summonsed
defendant.
Throughout the entirety of his dealings with defendant, Detective Bailey
believed defendant understood what the Detective was saying. Defendant's demeanor
was "perfectly fine" and he showed no adverse emotions. There was no indication
2 defendant did not want to speak or felt pressured to say anything. Defendant
understood his Miranda rights and agreed to waive them.
CONCLUSIONS
Voluntariness
Defendant argues his statements were not voluntary. In order to find a
statement voluntary, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement
resulted from the "defendant's exercise of his own free will and rational intellect." State
v. Caouette, 446 A.2d 1120, 1123-24 (Me. 1982). "A confession is voh.intary if it results
from the free choice of a rational mind, if it is not a product of coercive police conduct,
and if under all the circumstances its admission would be fundamentally fair." State v.
Mikulewicz, 462 A.2d 497, 501 (Me. 1983). The requirement that a statement must be
voluntary in order to be admissible "gives effect to three overlapping but conceptually
distinct values: (1) it discourages objectionable police practices; (2) it protects the
mental freedom of the individual; and (3) it preserves a quality of fundamental fairness
in the criminal justice system." Id. at 500.
Although the interview was not recorded, the testimony of Detective Bailey was
credible with regard to his interaction with defendant. There was no coercion.
Defendant understood what was happening and what was said, waived his Miranda
warnings, and chose how to proceed. On this record, based on the totality of the
circumstances, the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's
statements were voluntary. See State v. Sawyer, 2001 ME 88, 9I 9, 772 A.2d 1173.
Due Process
Defendant also argues his right to due process was som_ehow violated but did
not articulate any basis for that argument. Defendant agreed his waiver of his Miranda
rights was valid. When a violation of the right to due process is argued, the procedures
3 used by the police are reviewed "to determine if the conduct 'offends the community's
sense of justice, decency, and fair play."' State v. Bavouset, 2001 .ME 141, <][ 7, 784 A.2d
27 (quoting Roberts v. State, 48 F.3d 1287, 1291 (1st Cir. 1995)). A determination of
whether state action violates a defendant's right to due process involves consideration
of "(1) the private interest that will be affected by the State's action; (2) the risk of an
erroneous deprivation of that private interest along with the probable utility of
substitute or added safeguards; and (3) the government's interest in adhering to the
existent procedure." State v. Cote, 1999 .ME 123, <][ 12, 736 A.2d 262. There is no
evidence in this case of any violation of defendant's right to due process.
The entry is
The Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
Date: January 15, 2015 ancy Mills Justice, Superior Court
4 STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET vs CUMBERLAND, ss. CLEMENTE ALVARADO Docket No CUMCD-CR-2014-06647 35 DGE STREET TOP.:>rtAM ME 04086 DOCKET RECORD
DOB : 0 4 I 0 3 I 19 7 2 Attorney: LEONARD SHARON State's Attorney: MICHAEL MADIGAN LEONARD SHARON ESQ PC 223 MAIN STREET AUBURN ME 04210-5833 RETAINED 08/21/2014
Filing Document: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Major Case Type: MISDEMEANOR (CLASS D,E) Filing Date: 09/25/2014
Charge(s)
1 UNLAWFUL SEXUAL TOUCHING 0511112014 BRUNSWICK Seq 9308 17-A 260(1) (A) Class D BAILEY \ I BRU 2 ASSAULT 0511112014 BRUNSWICK Seq 8382 17-A 207 (1) (A) Class D BAILEY \ I BRU
Docket Events:
10 '2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 TRANSFER - PERMANENT TRANSFER EDI ON 10/08/2014 at 04:34 p.m.
TRANSFERRED CASE: SENDING COURT CASEID WESDCCR201400469 FILING DOCUMENT - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 09/25/2014
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
ENTERED JAN 3 0 2015' j ,.., ' :.'-''\\f
o·s 7 1 o Y ' /} tlxtM?~I- , .~~*·'
tr . . ~;"'·•·• J;,.V
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COVRf~t\ C.')Urts CUMBERLAND, ss CRIMINAL ACTION DOCKET NO. CR-14-6647 NDM--CMm~ 01-(5-15
STATE OF MAINE ZOlS JRN 21 PA 12 59 v. ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CLEMENTE ALVARADO,
Defendant
Heating on defendant's motion to suppress was held January 13, 2015.
Defendant argues his due process rights were violated and his statements were not
voluntary. For the following reasons, the motion is denied.
FACTS
Brunswick Police Department Detective Kenneth Bailey has served as School
Resource Officer for Brunswick High School for ten years. On 5/14/14, Amanda Faith
appeared at Detective Bailey's office with a friend and asked to speak to him.
During his investigation of the allegations, Detective Bailey took notes when
speaking to people and maintained an ongoing report on his computer. Detective
Bailey was unable to contact defendant for more than one month because defendant
was out of the state for work. Detective Bailey finally contacted defendant by phone
and said allegations had been made that should be discussed. Defendant agreed to go
to the police station to speak to Detective Bailey.
On July 1, 2014, a few days after the phone conversation, defendant arrived alone
at the police station just before 5:00p.m. Detective Bailey and defendant spoke in the
main lobby. Detective Bailey was in plain clothes. He did not recall whether he had a
weapon. He asked if defendant wanted to go to an interview room and defendant replied, "sure." They went to the interview room, which measures a few feet wide by a
few feet long. When Detective Bailey closed the door, he told defendant the door was
closed only for privacy and defendant was free to leave. The two sat approximately
three feet from each other. Although the Brunswick Police Department has the capacity
to record interviews, this interview was not recorded.
Detective Bailey told defendant Amanda had made allegations regarding
inappropriate conduct at a bowling alley, and the Detective wanted to talk about the
allegations. ·Detective Bailey read the Miranda warnings from the Brunswick Police
Department sheet. (State's Ex. A.) Defendant understood his rights and Detective
Bailey checked the boxes on the sheet, indicating defendant replied "yes" when asked if
he understood each paragraph. Defendant agreed to speak to Detective Bailey and
signed the sheet, as did Detective Bailey.
The conversation lasted ten to fifteen minutes. Detective Bailey asked what
happened. He then asked if defendant would prepare a written statement. The
Detective stated the statement did not have to be written at that time and defendant
could take the fonn with him. ·Defendant said he would be in contact when the
statement was completed. When the statement was not returned, Detective Bailey
called defendant. Defendant said he did not have time but he would complete the
statement. Detective Bailey never received the written statement.
Detective Bailey called defendant again and asked him to go to the police station.
At the station, Detective Bailey said he had enough information and summonsed
defendant.
Throughout the entirety of his dealings with defendant, Detective Bailey
believed defendant understood what the Detective was saying. Defendant's demeanor
was "perfectly fine" and he showed no adverse emotions. There was no indication
2 defendant did not want to speak or felt pressured to say anything. Defendant
understood his Miranda rights and agreed to waive them.
CONCLUSIONS
Voluntariness
Defendant argues his statements were not voluntary. In order to find a
statement voluntary, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement
resulted from the "defendant's exercise of his own free will and rational intellect." State
v. Caouette, 446 A.2d 1120, 1123-24 (Me. 1982). "A confession is voh.intary if it results
from the free choice of a rational mind, if it is not a product of coercive police conduct,
and if under all the circumstances its admission would be fundamentally fair." State v.
Mikulewicz, 462 A.2d 497, 501 (Me. 1983). The requirement that a statement must be
voluntary in order to be admissible "gives effect to three overlapping but conceptually
distinct values: (1) it discourages objectionable police practices; (2) it protects the
mental freedom of the individual; and (3) it preserves a quality of fundamental fairness
in the criminal justice system." Id. at 500.
Although the interview was not recorded, the testimony of Detective Bailey was
credible with regard to his interaction with defendant. There was no coercion.
Defendant understood what was happening and what was said, waived his Miranda
warnings, and chose how to proceed. On this record, based on the totality of the
circumstances, the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's
statements were voluntary. See State v. Sawyer, 2001 ME 88, 9I 9, 772 A.2d 1173.
Due Process
Defendant also argues his right to due process was som_ehow violated but did
not articulate any basis for that argument. Defendant agreed his waiver of his Miranda
rights was valid. When a violation of the right to due process is argued, the procedures
3 used by the police are reviewed "to determine if the conduct 'offends the community's
sense of justice, decency, and fair play."' State v. Bavouset, 2001 .ME 141, <][ 7, 784 A.2d
27 (quoting Roberts v. State, 48 F.3d 1287, 1291 (1st Cir. 1995)). A determination of
whether state action violates a defendant's right to due process involves consideration
of "(1) the private interest that will be affected by the State's action; (2) the risk of an
erroneous deprivation of that private interest along with the probable utility of
substitute or added safeguards; and (3) the government's interest in adhering to the
existent procedure." State v. Cote, 1999 .ME 123, <][ 12, 736 A.2d 262. There is no
evidence in this case of any violation of defendant's right to due process.
The entry is
The Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
Date: January 15, 2015 ancy Mills Justice, Superior Court
4 STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET vs CUMBERLAND, ss. CLEMENTE ALVARADO Docket No CUMCD-CR-2014-06647 35 DGE STREET TOP.:>rtAM ME 04086 DOCKET RECORD
DOB : 0 4 I 0 3 I 19 7 2 Attorney: LEONARD SHARON State's Attorney: MICHAEL MADIGAN LEONARD SHARON ESQ PC 223 MAIN STREET AUBURN ME 04210-5833 RETAINED 08/21/2014
Filing Document: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Major Case Type: MISDEMEANOR (CLASS D,E) Filing Date: 09/25/2014
Charge(s)
1 UNLAWFUL SEXUAL TOUCHING 0511112014 BRUNSWICK Seq 9308 17-A 260(1) (A) Class D BAILEY \ I BRU 2 ASSAULT 0511112014 BRUNSWICK Seq 8382 17-A 207 (1) (A) Class D BAILEY \ I BRU
Docket Events:
10 '2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 TRANSFER - PERMANENT TRANSFER EDI ON 10/08/2014 at 04:34 p.m.
TRANSFERRED CASE: SENDING COURT CASEID WESDCCR201400469 FILING DOCUMENT - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 09/25/2014
Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING- ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 10/07/2014 at 08:30a.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT WAIVED ON 08/21/2014
Charge(s): 1,2 PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY COUNSEL ON 08/21/2014
Party(s): CLEMENTE ALVARADO ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 08/21/2014
Attorney: LEONARD SHARON Charge(s): 1,2 FINDING - PERMANENT TRANSFER TRANSFERRED ON 10/08/2014
CUM CD 10/28/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 TRANSFER - PERMANENT TRANSFER RECVD BY COURT ON 10/23/2014 TERESA SAWYER-BLACK , ASSISTANT CLERK CR 200 Page 1 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015 CLEMENTE ALVARADO CUMCD-CR-2014-06647 DOCKET RECORD WESDC CR-2014-469 10/Lu/2014 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 12/18/2014 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. 7
10/28/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 TRIAL- JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 02/09/2015 at 08:30a.m. in Room No. 11
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/09/2014 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE NOTICE SENT ON 12/09/2014
12/18/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/18/2014
12/18/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 01/13/2015 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/18/2014 MOTION - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/18/2014
12/18/2014 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SCHEDULED FOR 01/13/2015 at 01:00p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/18/2014 MOTION - OTHER MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/18/2014
MOTION FOR PREPARATION OF REPORT ON INJURIES. 12/18/2014 HEARING - OTHER MOTION SCHEDULED FOR 01/13/2015 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. 1
MOTION FOR PREPARATION OF REPORT ON INJURIES. 12/18/2014 MOTION - MOTION IN LIMINE FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/18/2014
TO EXCLUDE UNCHARGED CONDUCT. 12/19/2014 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE HELD ON 12/18/2014 JEFF MOSKOWITZ , JUDGE Attorney: LEONARD SHARON DA: JENNIFER ACKERMAN MOTIONS FILED AND SET FOR 1-13-15 AT 1:00 P.M. PARTIES NOTIFIED. 12/30/2014 LETTER - FROM PARTY FILED ON 12/30/2014
Attorney: LEONARD SHARON LETTER INFORMING THE COURT THAT ATTORNEY IS GOING FORWARD WITH MOTION TO SUPPRESS AND ANTICIPATES HEARING WILL LAST 1 1/2 HOURS. 01/14/2015 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT HELD ON 01/13/2015 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE Attorney: LEONARD SHARON DA: JULIA SHERIDAN Defendant Present in Court
TAPE 6220 INDEX 3128-4175 TESTIMONY OFFICER BAILEY INDEX 3204 MOTIONS DISCOVERY, PREP OF REPORT CONTINUED ADA MADIGAN NOT AVAILABLE MOTION IN LIMINE TO BE ADDRESSED BY TRIAL JUDGE STATE'S EXIBIT A SUBMITTED MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT 01/14/2015 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT UNDER ADVISEMENT ON 01/13/2015 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT BY JUDGE MILLS OJ 12015 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY CONTINUED ON 01/13/2015 CR 200 Page 2 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015 CLEMENTE ALVARADO CUMCD-CR-2014-06647 DOCKET RECORD NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE CONTINUED TO 1.29.15 01/14/2015 HEARING- MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SCHEDULED FOR 01/29/2015 at 01:00p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/14/2015 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY NOTICE SENT ON 01/13/2015 KRISTINA JOYCE , ASSISTANT CLERK 01/14/2015 HEARING - OTHER MOTION NOT HELD ON 01/13/2015
MOTION FOR PREPARATION OF REPORT ON INJURIES. 01/21/2015 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT DENIED ON 01/15/2015 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/21/2015 ORDER - COURT ORDER FILED ON 01/21/2015
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS 01/21/2015 ORDER - COURT ORDER ENTERED ON 01/15/2015 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS IS DENIED
"'1 COJ.Y'"':r;.i.VEN TO ATTORNEY, ADA, AND MARIAH 'J!.. A TRUE COPY ATTEST: Clerk
CR 200 Page 3 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015