Commonwealth v. Perez-Rodriguez

Docket Number1381 MDA 2022,J-S24032-23
Decision Date31 July 2023
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RAPHAEL E. PEREZ-RODRIGUEZ Appellant
CourtPennsylvania Superior Court

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered April 22, 2022 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-06-CR-0002261-2020

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., LAZARUS, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E [*]

MEMORANDUM

STEVENS, P.J.E.

Appellant Raphael E. Perez-Rodriguez, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County following his conviction by a jury on the charges of first-degree murder, burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, two counts of receiving stolen property, and two counts of firearms not to be carried without a license.[1] After a careful review, we affirm.

The relevant facts and procedural history are as follows: The charges in the instant matter stem from a traffic stop of Appellant, which then led to an investigation and the arrest of Appellant for the murder of Dennis Fink ("the Victim"), who had been stabbed to death, as well as the burglary of the Victim's residence.

On December 11, 2020, Appellant filed a counseled omnibus pre-trial suppression motion wherein he sought the suppression of all evidence seized from the Victim's house, which is located on Tully Lane in Reading, Pennsylvania. Appellant averred the police improperly entered and conducted an unconstitutional warrantless search of the Victim's house. The Commonwealth, in response, averred Appellant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the Victim's home. Further, the Commonwealth asserted the police properly entered and conducted a warrantless search of the Victim's residence due to exigent circumstances.

On January 25, 2021, Appellant proceeded to a suppression hearing at the commencement of which the Commonwealth moved for the transcript from Appellant's preliminary hearing to be marked as an exhibit, and Appellant indicated he had no objection. N.T., 1/25/21, suppression hearing, at 4. The Commonwealth then offered the testimony of Vincent Caruso, who is the system administrator for the inmate telephone system at the Berks County jail, and Berks County Detective Ivan. R. Martinez. The suppression court, indicating it adopted the testimony and evidence from the preliminary hearing, as well as the suppression hearing, aptly summarized the relevant evidence as follows:

At approximately 7:40 p.m., in the evening on July 16, 2020 Officer Eric Koller of the City of Reading Police Department was on patrol in the 500 block of Washington Street in the City of Reading when he observed a black Honda CRV ("the Vehicle") with a Minnesota license plate that appeared to be altered. N.T., 8/26/20, preliminary hearing, at 4-5. Having noticed the allegedly altered license plate, Officer Koller checked the registration information electronically, which returned a result that the Vehicle was reported stolen. Id. at 5. Officer Koller continued to follow the Vehicle, but before he could initiate a traffic stop, the Vehicle parked in the 100 block of North 3rd Street, whereupon the driver, later identified as [Appellant], exited the Vehicle. Id. at 5-6. Backup [officers] arrived shortly thereafter, and [Appellant] was detained in handcuffs until the patrol wagon arrived, and [Appellant] was placed therein. Id. at 7.
Loud music continued to play from a wireless speaker inside the Vehicle, and Officer Koller reapproached the Vehicle to turn off the music. Id. As Officer Koller reached into the Vehicle to turn the speaker off, he noticed a small, blue, Ziplock bag containing a white, powdery substance located in the handhold of the driver's side door. Id. Officer Koller recovered the bag and continued to search the rest of the Vehicle. Id. Under the driver's seat, Officer Koller found two loaded handguns-a semi-automatic and a revolver. Id. at 8. Two knives were found between the driver's seat and the door jamb. Id. In the cargo area, police found a rifle and semi-automatic shotgun, as well as a bubble envelope addressed to the Victim containing CO2 cartridges for a BB gun and several bank cards in the Victim's name. Id.
Officer Koller later performed a NARK-2 field test on the suspected drugs from the vehicle, which indicated a positive result for cocaine. Id. at 9. A [records] check also indicated that [Appellant] did not have a valid license to carry the firearms. Id. When [Appellant] was arrested, he was found in possession of several personal items belonging to the Victim, including a high school ring, an Air Force Academy graduation ring, several wedding bands, and a tie bar. Id. at 15.
Officer Koller informed Eric Sweitzer, a criminal investigator with the Reading Police Department ("C.I. Sweitzer"), about the stolen Vehicle investigation and notified C.I. Sweitzer about items found in the stolen Vehicle belonging to the Victim. Id. at 16. C.I. Sweitzer researched the Victim's name and found an individual who was listed as living at the property located at ** Tully Lane in Reading, Pennsylvania ("the Property"). Id. C.I. Sweitzer visited the Property, observed that some exterior and interior lights were on, and then attempted to make contact with the owner. Id. at 17. However, C.I. Sweitzer was unsuccessful and left his business card in the door. Id. at 18. C.I. Sweitzer returned to the Property the next day and noticed that the Property looked to be in exactly the same condition as the night before, including his business card still stuck in the door. Id. C.I. Sweitzer, along with Criminal Investigator Scott Errington, then walked to the rear of the residence to attempt contact, but they were unsuccessful. Id. at 19. C.I. Sweitzer then contacted the local police department and requested an officer onsite so that a welfare check could be performed. Id. at 20.
After the local officer arrived, C.I. Sweitzer entered the Property through an unlocked door of the kitchen/dining room. Id. Once inside, C.I. Sweitzer announced himself, but he found no one was inside; however, he found a small, black dog in a cage, alive and barking. Id. at 21. C.I. Sweitzer observed that the cabinet doors in the kitchen were open, and the house seemed unkempt. Id. at 21-22. Making their way through the home looking for the Victim or anyone else, the investigators noticed that closets were left open with lights on, and the house looked like it had been ransacked. Id. at 22. Likewise, the garage and basement lights were left on, and a blue Tesla vehicle was still in the garage. Id. Sensing that something was not right, C.I. Sweitzer was leaving the Property to contact possible family members when he noticed a duffle bag, in which he could see, without manipulation, a baseball cap and a glass jar containing suspected marijuana. Id. at 22-23.
C.I. Sweitzer was unable to garner further information on the Victim's whereabouts from family members, so he applied for a search warrant for the Property to retrieve the suspected marijuana, which was then approved. Id. During the search, [the Victim's] decomposing body was found in the wooded area abutting the Property. Id. at 24-25.
***
On July 16, 2020, [before the traffic stop involving Appellant], Jeffrey Neubauer, an individual living in the same neighborhood as the Victim, noticed a young girl with a lost dog outside of his home. Id. at 37-38. Mr. Neubauer took the dog, called the phone numbers on the dog's tags, and found out the address listed for the dog was ** Tully Lane. Id. at 38. Mr. Neubauer and his girlfriend then traveled to the Property to return the dog. Id. When Mr. Neubauer and his girlfriend approached the Property, they noticed it appeared unkempt. Id. at 39. Upon ringing the doorbell twice and knocking on the door, a man, whom Mr. Neubauer identified as [Appellant], answered the door wearing cargo shorts, a muscle t-shirt, and a red-brimmed cap[.] Id. at 39-40. [Appellant] only opened the door halfway. Id. Mr. Neubauer did not remember whether [Appellant] answered in the affirmative when asked whether the lost dog was his, but he recalled [Appellant] grabbed the dog. Id. at 40. When Mr. Neubauer's girlfriend asked [Appellant] if he was "Dennis," [Appellant] responded with "Yes." Id. at 61. Mr. Neubauer noted that the interaction seemed odd because [Appellant] did not appear to be happy to have his dog returned. Id. at 42. Mr. Neubauer checked on Facebook and found that the Victim, Dennis Fink, was actually an older white male. Id. The next day, Mr. Neubauer was presented with a photo lineup whereupon he identified [Appellant] as the individual he saw at the Property the day prior. Id.
On July 17, 2020, Detective Ivan Martinez ("Detective Martinez"), who was with the Berks County District Attorney's Office, was called to the Property for a body that had been found. Id. at 46-47. Detective Martinez arrived at the Property and proceeded to the wooded area adjacent to the rear where there was a body lying face down and covered in brush. Id. at 47. The body was later identified as the Victim, who was the owner the Property. Id. at 48. The next day, after preparing a search warrant that was approved, Detective Martinez participated in the search of the Property, during which he observed that the home appeared to have been ransacked. Id. at 48-49. A bag, that did not appear to be the Victim's, was found containing a gun, money, and coins. Id. at 49. Also seized was the baseball cap and suspected marijuana. Id. at 51-52.
On July 20, 2020, Detective Martinez, along with Detective Sergeant Brett Forry, met with [Appellant] at the Berks County Jail System for an interview. Id. at 52-53. During the interview, [Appellant] told Detective Martinez that he came
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT