Anderson v. State
| Decision Date | 18 October 2022 |
| Docket Number | 1391-2021 |
| Parties | TYRELL ANDERSON v. STATE OF MARYLAND |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Circuit Court for Washington County Case No.: C-21-CR-20-119
Berger, Friedman, Harrell, Glenn T., Jr., (Senior Judge Specially Assigned), JJ.
Harrell, J. Appellant, Tyrell Anderson, was indicted in the Circuit Court for Washington County and charged with numerous firearms and ammunition possession offenses, traffic offenses, and recklessly discharging a firearm from a vehicle. Convicted by a jury of multiple counts of illegally possessing a regulated firearm, illegal possession of ammunition, recklessly discharging a firearm from a vehicle, as well as various traffic offenses, including fleeing and eluding and other related counts, Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate term of thirty (30) years' incarceration, with all but twenty-one (21) years suspended, and the first ten (10) years to be served without the possibility of parole, all to be followed by eighteen (18) months supervised probation. Upon this timely appeal, Appellant asks us to address the following questions:
For the following reasons, we shall vacate Appellant's sentences and remand for resentencing; otherwise, the judgments are affirmed.
On the night of 25 January 2020, several witnesses heard gunshots on the residential streets of Hagerstown, Maryland. One of them, Kevin Reichenbaugh, provided the police with a video surveillance recording taken from his home security system, located at 125 North Locust Street. The video showed an unidentified individual standing up through the sunroof of a gray Acura CL (with a different color hood), firing a handgun at a residence.
Five .22 caliber shell casings were found in the road near the location and impact strike marks were found on 126 North Locust Street.
Two days later, on 27 January 2020 at approximately 5:30 p.m., Hagerstown police received additional reports of shots fired in the same area.[1] As part of the investigation, Deputy Jesse Patterson obtained a copy of a video recording from a city-owned surveillance camera. A "grayish whitish" car with a sunroof was seen in the area at around the time as the reported shots were fired. Photographs and the video were played in court for the jury.
The driver of the Acura was identified as Hope Cashwell. The passenger, who was wearing a blue jacket and a face mask, was holding a handgun. The deputy opined that the firearm was "a smaller firearm one that easily could be concealed on someone's person, in their pocket."
A vehicle matching the description of the one seen on the video surveillance from January 25th and 27th was found on January 28th in a nearby church parking lot. While police were observing the vehicle and the surrounding area, Cashwell and an African-American male, wearing a blue jacket that appeared identical to the one seen in the January 27th video, approached. After they got in the vehicle and drove out of the church parking lot, police attempted to stop the car, to no avail. Thereafter, a high speed police chase, which included a collision with an unidentified moving vehicle, ensued. Appellant and Cashwell were arrested at the conclusion of that pursuit.
At the time of the arrest, Appellant was wearing the same blue jacket identified earlier. Police found a vehicle inspection report connected to the Acura inside his jacket pocket. Appellant was wearing a gray, hooded sweatshirt, and a ski mask was found on his person. In addition, two .22 caliber shell casings were found on the passenger side floor board of the vehicle. No gun was recovered in this case.
As part of the State's case-in-chief, the jury heard from Hope Cashwell, the driver of the Acura. After explaining the circumstances surrounding her testimony, including that she was incarcerated presently and testifying pursuant to a plea agreement, Cashwell informed the jury that, during the time in question, she and Appellant were living together and involved in a sexual relationship. Cashwell confirmed that she was driving the vehicle seen on the night of 25 January 2020, and that Appellant was her passenger.[2] She explained also that the motivation for the shootings was that, about a week and a half earlier, she and Appellant fled from the scene of an unrelated traffic accident without providing any identifying information to the other driver.[3] Shortly after that, an unidentified person threw a brick through the window of Appellant's residence.
On 25 January 2020, after Appellant told her he intended to retaliate for the brick incident, Cashwell drove Appellant, in the aforementioned Acura, to the residence at issue. There, after stopping momentarily, Appellant stood up through the open sunroof and fired his .22 caliber handgun at the residence. Two days later, on 27 January 2020, Cashwell and Appellant were driving in the same area when Appellant again fired five or six shots from the same handgun out the passenger side window of the moving Acura. Cashwell maintained that Appellant used the same .22 caliber handgun on January 25th and January 27th.
The next day, January 28th, Cashwell and Appellant were together again in the Acura when a police officer attempted to stop their vehicle. At Appellant's direction, she "proceeded to flee and elude the police." She saw "multiple" police cars chasing her along the approximately four mile long pursuit. During the chase, Cashwell collided with another vehicle, but Appellant told her not to stop and to keep going. At some point after this collision, Appellant threw his handgun out the window of the moving vehicle. Cashwell pulled over eventually, parked, and she and Appellant started to walk away from the vehicle, just prior to their arrest.
We shall include additional details as may be relevant to our following analysis.
Appellant first contends that the circuit court erred in denying the motion to suppress the fruits of his warrantless arrest because: (1) the police lacked a sufficient basis to arrest him, as a passenger, for Cashwell's traffic violations on January 28th; and, (2) there was no probable cause to believe he was involved in the shootings on January 25th and 27th. The State disputes this contention, in light of the standard of review, and maintains that Appellant's arrest was lawful under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. We agree with the State.
At the motions hearing, the court heard from Detective Jason Dietz, a twenty-year veteran of the Hagerstown Police Department. On 25 January 2020, at approximately 11:54 p.m., Detective Dietz responded to the area near 126 North Locust Street for a report of shots fired. Police obtained surveillance video recorded by a private citizen who lived nearby. The recording showed a silver Acura, with a distinctive white hood, stop in the street in front of 126 North Locust Street. At that point, a male front-seat passenger, wearing a light colored hooded sweatshirt, stood up through the sunroof and fired several shots toward the residence. Upon further investigation, police found impact strike marks on the building, as well as five .22 caliber shell casings on the street.[4]
Two days later, January 27th, at around 5:30 p.m., there was another report of shots fired in the same area. Witnesses reported hearing as many as four gunshots. The police reviewed city-owned surveillance cameras from the area. According to Detective Dietz, that recording showed a "silver two-door sedan with a white hood and sunroof" in the area at the time of the shooting. Police determined this was the same vehicle that was seen two days earlier. Unlike the recording obtained from the private citizen on January 25th, the January 27th recording did not show shots fired, but showed only the vehicle leaving the aforementioned area. Detective Dietz also agreed, on cross-examination, that no shell casings were recovered after this second shooting and no additional impact strikes were discovered on the nearby buildings.
Because the recording from January 27th was taken during daylight hours and of better quality, the police were able to determine that the driver of the Acura was a white female, identified as Hope Cashwell. The front seat passenger was an unidentified African-American male wearing a blue leather-style jacket, with white markings near the cuffs. Detective Dietz testified that the male was wearing a black mask and appeared to be holding "a silver object in his right hand that we believed to be a handgun at the time."[5]
According to the detective, at some point, another officer with the Hagerstown Police Department obtained a "tracker warrant" for the Acura. Sergeant Jesse Duffey, also from the Hagerstown Police Department, testified that the tracker was placed on the Acura at around 11:00 a.m. on 28 January 2020 when it was parked in the Otterbein church parking lot. Subsequently, he and another police detective parked nearby, in an unmarked police vehicle, and maintained surveillance near the church. Sergeant Duffey had seen the videos from January 25th and 27th, and was aware that Cashwell and an unidentified African-American male wearing a blue leather jacket were considered to be involved.
At some point, Sergeant Duffey observed Cashwell and Appellant, whom he identified in court, approach the area and walk into the church parking lot. Appellant was wearing a blue leather jacket.
After Appellant and Cashwell walked into...
To continue reading
Request your trial