Manning v. State
| Decision Date | 15 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 434-2021,506-2021 |
| Parties | FRANK WALTER MANNING, JR. v. STATE OF MARYLAND |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Circuit Court for Queen Anne's County Case No C-17-CR-20-000175
Zic Ripken,, Wright, Alexander, Jr. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.
Ripken, J. Frank Manning ("Manning") appeals his convictions in the Circuit Court for Queen Anne's County of first- and fourth-degree burglary. Manning moved to suppress evidence seized at the time of his arrest in an unrelated incident and seized through warrant-authorized searches of his cell phone. The circuit court denied Manning's motions to suppress. Manning entered a plea of not guilty, and an agreed statement of facts as to first-and fourth-degree burglary ensued. The circuit court found Manning guilty of both counts. On appeal, Manning challenges the circuit court's denial of his motions to suppress.
For the reasons explained below, we shall affirm the circuit court's ruling on the motions.
On December 31, 2019, two handguns, magazines and ammunition prescription medicine, and a bag containing loose change were stolen from a home in Henderson, Maryland. On February 3, 2020, a shotgun, jewelry, five hundred dollars, and a purse and wallet were stolen from a home in Marydel, Maryland.
On February 5, 2020, police arrested Manning and David Young ("Young") for reasons unrelated to the burglaries. Police seized Manning's cell phone and recovered items taken during the Marydel burglary from Manning following his arrest. Young made a statement to police indicating that, via text message, Manning had sent him a photograph of a firearm that he was attempting to sell. Police searched Manning's phone pursuant to a warrant dated February 10, 2020, and searched records maintained by the cellular network provider pursuant to a warrant dated February 26, 2020. The search pursuant to the February 10 warrant uncovered photographs of the handguns and ammunition stolen from the Henderson home, text messages concerning the sale of the handguns, and text messages between Manning and an associate who assisted Manning during the Marydel burglary. Manning was charged with, among other crimes, fourth-degree burglary relating to the Henderson home and first-degree burglary relating to the Marydel home.[1]
Manning moved to suppress evidence obtained during his arrest, including his cell phone, as well as evidence obtained in the warrant-authorized searches of his cell phone. He first argued that his initial detention violated the Fourth Amendment and, second, that the warrants for his cell phone were overbroad. The circuit court held a suppression hearing.
Deputy Stivers of the Caroline County Sherriff's Office testified at the hearing as follows. On February 5, he was training another deputy, Deputy Beck, and was aware that Talbot County had an outstanding bench warrant for Young for failure to appear for a traffic offense. Deputy Stivers was familiar with Young from previous encounters, including one in which someone overdosed on heroin at Young's residence. Deputies Stivers and Beck went to Young's residence, where they observed a red Monte Carlo parked in the driveway. Several minutes later, the deputies drove by again, and Deputy Stivers noticed that the car's interior dome light was on. Deputy Stivers pulled into the driveway directly behind the Monte Carlo and illuminated it with the patrol car's spotlight. He recognized Young seated in the passenger seat.
The deputies got out and approached the driver and passenger doors of the Monte Carlo. As Deputy Stivers walked toward the driver's side, he could see the outline of the driver's head and shoulders; he later identified the person seated in the driver's seat as Manning. As Deputy Stivers approached, he saw Manning "real quickly and abruptly" lean forward and down "towards . . . his right leg area" or "the down center console, floor board area," and then "sat right back up and sat still." Deputy Stivers described that, in his experience, this was a "furtive" movement, which potentially indicated that Manning was hiding a weapon or contraband. Deputy Stivers announced to the individuals in the Monte Carlo that the officers were there to serve a bench warrant. He instructed Deputy Beck to question Young, check his license, and remove him from the car. Deputy Stivers positioned himself in front of the driver's door to prevent Manning from exiting. Deputy Stivers opened the driver-side door and asked Manning about the reaching movement. A long, serrated knife rolled from the car when Deputy Stivers opened the door, and he retrieved it and placed it on the roof. Deputy Stivers recognized the knife as a tool for cutting drywall.
Deputy Stivers asked Manning about his earlier downward reaching movement. The deputy explained at the hearing: "every time I asked questions, such as, is there anything in the car that I need to know about, is there any drugs in the car, stuff like that[, ] [Manning] would answer no, but he would always look down to his right area[.]" Manning glanced to his right several times while Deputy Stivers was questioning him.[2] He explained that Manning's body language was "indicative [of] when someone is either guilty or knows there is something in the vehicle." Deputy Stivers told Manning that he was being detained and was not free to leave.
The encounter, which occurred on a cold evening around 9 p.m., led Deputy Stivers to believe that Manning was hiding contraband, such as a weapon, needle, or pipe. He explained: "I've been to the residence before for drug-related issues and I don't think any normal person would sit in a vehicle at that hour and that temperature for no reason."
Deputy Stivers asked Manning to get out of the car. Deputy Stivers explained his reasons for doing so:
I had a sweater on that was getting damp, so . . . I didn't want to walk away from the vehicle and leave him in it. So I was going to have him step out, stand in front of my car so my partner could watch him and grab my jacket and then proceed with the vehicle search.
Manning stepped out of the car and fled towards the side of the house. Deputy Stivers ordered Manning to stop and chased him. Manning tripped and fell. As Manning was getting up, Deputy Stivers tackled him. Manning struck Deputy Stivers approximately three times while struggling to get free. Deputy Stivers used his taser to subdue Manning and place him under arrest. At the time Manning fled, Deputy Beck put Young in the patrol car so as to be available to assist Deputy Stivers. A search incident to Manning's arrest turned up jewelry, $899 in cash, and heroin. Officers later found Manning's cell phone near the area that Manning was arrested. Manning was charged with a number of offenses including assault, resisting arrest, and possession of controlled dangerous substances. After Manning was arrested, the officers confirmed with Talbot County that the bench warrant for Young remained active.
Manning also testified at the suppression hearing. He testified that he was in the driver's seat of the Monte Carlo in the driveway of his residence. He noticed someone approaching the car, but he was not sure whether the person was a law enforcement officer. He denied leaning forward as the officer approached. He acknowledged that he glanced to the right during Deputy Stivers's questioning, but explained that he was glancing to the car's interior generally. Manning denied swinging at Deputy Stivers during the struggle.
At the hearing, the State also introduced video recorded by the patrol car camera and audio recorded by Deputy Stivers's microphone. The video showed the Monte Carlo's headlights and brake lights activated as the deputies drove into the driveway directly behind the Monte Carlo. Deputy Stivers immediately approached the driver-side door and Deputy Beck the passenger-side door. Deputy Stivers instructed Deputy Beck to check Young's license and to detain Young. Young was placed in handcuffs off camera and remained on the side of the patrol car. Deputy Stivers opened Manning's door and asked Manning for identification. He radioed Manning's information and received a response that there was "no information" for Manning. Deputy Stivers then told Deputy Beck "once they confirm [the warrant] you can search [Young] and put him in the truck." Deputy Stivers then told dispatch that he has the "paperwork" for Young in his office, but he wants to confirm the warrant with Talbot County. Shortly before Manning fled, Deputy Stivers told Young, "maybe they recalled the warrant," "if they did, then we're leaving."
In argument on the motion to suppress, the State argued two valid bases existed to justify the search of Manning. First the State argued that Manning could justifiably be detained for the duration of a stop of the Monte Carlo once the deputies recognized the passenger of the Monte Carlo as the subject of a bench warrant. The State argued that Manning's detention was necessary for officer safety given the recovery of the knife and the need to keep Manning in sight. Second, the State argued that the deputies had an independent reasonable articulable suspicion that Manning possessed controlled dangerous substances based on the officer's familiarity with the residence and interaction with Manning.[3] Manning responded that the officers could not have detained him, as they may have done incidental to a traffic stop, because the Monte Carlo was in a private driveway and the engine was not running. He also argued that his conduct was innocuous and could not give rise to a reasonable articulable suspicion. Therefore, he contended, the evidence recovered following his arrest was the product of an...
To continue reading
Request your trial