Commonwealth v. Ani
| Decision Date | 21 July 2022 |
| Docket Number | 465 MDA 2021,J-A10034-22 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. NNAEMEKA RAPHAEL ANI Appellant |
| Court | Superior Court of Pennsylvania |
Appellant Nnaemeka Raphael Ani, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Centre County Court of Common Pleas, following his jury trial convictions for rape by forcible compulsion sexual assault, aggravated indecent assault without complainant's consent, aggravated indecent assault by forcible compulsion, criminal trespass, indecent assault by forcible compulsion, and indecent assault without complainant's consent.[1] We affirm.
The relevant facts and procedural history of this case are as follows. On October 18, 2017, E.R. reported that an individual broke into her apartment at 1003 West Aaron Drive and raped her. She stated that she was sleeping when she was awoken by someone entering her room. The assailant took off her sweatpants and underwear and penetrated her with both his penis and fingers. After the attack, he got off the bed and dropped a very large wallet while putting his pants on. The assailant picked up the wallet and ran out the door. E.R. screamed for her roommate and the two women called the police and described the assailant as an unknown black male, approximately 5' 8" tall, wearing grey sweatpants and a blue shirt. E.R. was taken to the hospital where she underwent a sexual assault examination and physical exam.
After responding to E.R.'s apartment, police collected evidence including E.R.'s clothing and sheets, a used condom, an open condom wrapper, and a box of condoms. Officers also collected DNA swabs from E.R.'s consensual sexual partner. The case went unsolved for over a year.
Over the next couple years police received multiple reports of break-ins in the West Aaron Drive apartment complex. On December 15, 2018, police received information that a male intruder had entered a female's apartment. Upon responding, police discovered a footprint was left by the intruder. Later that morning, police received a call from Cheyenne Chandler, stating that she saw a person enter her bedroom in dark clothing; however, the individual was scared off by Ms. Chandler's dog.
Two days later, on December 17, 2018, at about 6:45 a.m., Ms. Chandler and her friend again noticed a person attempting to break into her apartment, and immediately called the police. Ms. Chandler described the suspect as an African American male, average height and build, who was wearing a dark hoodie. Sergeant Devon Moran, the responding officer, was aware of previous incidents of criminal trespass, sexual assault, and burglary in the West Aaron Drive apartment complex. He arrived at the complex within five minutes of the complaint. Sergeant Moran observed Appellant, who was of average height and thin build, wearing a dark hoodie, walking on the sidewalk about 200 feet from the apartment. When Sergeant Moran doubled back, Appellant took an evasive hard right turn, exited a common entrance to one of the buildings, and began to jog away from the officer. Sergeant Moran caught up with Appellant and identified himself as police.
Appellant told Sergeant Moran that he had been out jogging; however, the sergeant stated that Appellant's explanation did not make sense because Appellant was wearing pajama pants and a heavy hooded sweatshirt and had a very thick wallet in his left pocket. Sergeant Moran asked for Appellant's identification and informed him that there were reports of recent break-ins in the area. Appellant had a very thick wallet with him, with many cards in it. Appellant could not produce identification, but he agreed to return to his apartment with the officer to get his ID. As they walked back, Sergeant Moran observed Appellant's footprint on the pavement and believed it was a likely match to the footprint left by the intruder in the December 15, 2018 trespass.
Detective Caleb Clouse, who was one of the lead investigators of the October 2017 rape of E.R., was at the police station on December 17, 2018, heard the call come in about another trespass on West Aaron Drive, and responded to the scene. Detective Clouse accompanied Appellant to his apartment so that Appellant could find his ID. At this point, Detective Clouse had already concluded that probable cause existed to obtain a warrant for a DNA sample from Appellant to compare it to the unsolved rape case. The detective based this conclusion on the location (the trespass occurred within 100 yards of the rape victim's apartment), and the fact that Appellant matched the physical description that E.R. had provided to police and was carrying a large wallet similar to that which E.R. reported her attacker had dropped. Furthermore, Appellant's statement that he had been jogging was not consistent with his attire and the thick wallet he was carrying.
After Appellant retrieved his ID, Detective Clouse told him that there had been a sexual assault in the area and asked if Appellant would give a DNA sample so police could compare it with the DNA that they had from the perpetrator. Appellant refused. Officers then proceeded to question Appellant for over an hour. Detective Clouse left the apartment at this time to apply for a search warrant for Appellant's DNA, clothing, and cell phone. The officers did not issue Appellant Miranda[2] warnings at any time during the apartment questioning.
Police then escorted Appellant to the station where officers read him Miranda warnings and then continued questioning him. Appellant initially stated that he felt pressured and was given a short break, but then questioning resumed despite Appellant requesting an attorney. During his time at the police station, Appellant asked for an attorney at least three times, but he was informed that he could not call a private attorney.
Later that afternoon, police obtained and executed a search warrant for Appellant's DNA and to recover Appellant's clothing and cell phone.[3] Police subsequently obtained a search warrant for Appellant's records from a counseling and psychological services (CAPS) program at Penn State University.
On March 1, 2019, the Commonwealth filed an information charging Appellant with rape, sexual assault, two counts of aggravated indecent assault, criminal trespass, and two counts of indecent assault, based on the October 18, 2017 rape of E.R.[4] On April 4, 2019, Appellant filed an omnibus pre-trial motion seeking, inter alia, suppression of all statements he made before he was taken to the police station, statements he made at the police station, and all evidence collected following the making of these statements, including the DNA evidence. Appellant also sought authorization to hire an expert in DNA analysis. He filed a supplemental omnibus motion on May 7, 2019, seeking suppression of the CAPS reports from Penn State University.
The court conducted a suppression hearing on May 10, 2019, and May 23, 2019. On November 15, 2019, the trial court entered an opinion and order granting the omnibus pretrial motion in part and denying it in part. Specifically, the court found that Appellant's encounter with police on December 17, 2018, became custodial soon after entering the apartment, and that he was subject to interrogation during the time he was in the apartment.[5](Trial Court Opinion, 11/15/19, at 20-22). Therefore, the court suppressed any incriminating statements made by Appellant while in the apartment. The court also suppressed incriminating statements Appellant made while interrogated at the police station. The court decided that after officers read Appellant his Miranda rights, Appellant requested an attorney and was not provided one. (Id. at 25-26). The court noted that "contrary to the Commonwealth's argument, [Appellant] was not told he could call a private attorney if he chose; quite the opposite, he was informed he did not have the right to a phone call when asked about being able to do so." (Id. at 26) (emphasis and footnote omitted).
Nevertheless, the court found that the material facts supporting the warrant for a DNA sample (namely, Appellant's clothing and his cellphone) had been established before the interrogation in Appellant's apartment. Therefore, the court did not suppress the DNA evidence collected pursuant to this warrant. (Id. at 28-29). Furthermore, the court found that looking at the totality of the circumstances set forth in the affidavit for the warrant, the information sufficiently established a fair probability that Appellant's DNA, clothing, and cell phone would yield evidence related to the 2017 rape investigation, and therefore denied Appellant's motion to suppress based on lack of probable cause. (Id. at 35). The court granted Appellant's motion seeking funds for a DNA expert.
Regarding the supplemental omnibus motion, the court granted suppression of Appellant's records from CAPS, finding that it constituted "fruit of the poisonous tree," because police would not have known Appellant was seeing a counselor at CAPS absent the unlawful interrogation. (Id. at 31).
While this case was pending, police received another report of a criminal trespass similar in nature to those that occurred at the West Aaron Drive apartment complex. This incident occurred at the University Terrace Apartments, where Appellant was residing at the time. The incident occurred on November 2, 2019, at about 7:40 a.m. Complainant N.B. was in bed and heard her bedroom door creak open and someone turn a phone...
To continue reading
Request your trial