State v. Bonilla

Decision Date31 December 2019
Docket NumberAppellate Case No. 2016-001725,Opinion No. 5702
Citation429 S.C. 253,838 S.E.2d 1
Parties The STATE, Respondent, v. Edward Primo BONILLA, Appellant.
CourtSouth Carolina Court of Appeals

Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Melody Jane Brown, and Assistant Attorney General Susannah Rawl Cole, all of Columbia; and Solicitor David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, all for Respondent.

GEATHERS, J.:

Edward Primo Bonilla was convicted of murder for the killing of Ashley Pegram and sentenced to life imprisonment. Bonilla appeals his conviction, arguing the circuit court erred in 1) finding Bonilla gave his attorney informed consent to disclose the location of Ashley's body; 2) admitting evidence obtained from the search of Bonilla's mother's Hyundai Sonata; 3) admitting evidence obtained from the search of a van owned by Bonilla's employer; and 4) refusing to grant Bonilla an in camera hearing on the qualifications of Investigator Jeff Scott and the reliability of his testimony. We affirm.

FACTS

The investigation into Ashley's disappearance

Around March 15, 2015, Bonilla and Ashley Pegram1 met on the online social site Meetme.com, and the two communicated for about a month using the messaging app "Kik." On April 3, 2015, Bonilla and Ashley arranged to meet in person and attend a bonfire hosted by Bonilla's brother. During their communications, Ashley indicated that she did not have a car, and Bonilla offered to pick her up from the house she shared with her parents in Summerville. Ashley then asked if he would pick up some beer for her, and Bonilla agreed. After Bonilla left his house, Ashley texted him her address, and he entered it into his phone's GPS. Shortly before 9:30 p.m., Bonilla arrived in a Hyundai Sonata, and the two left for the bonfire.

Ashley and Bonilla arrived at his brother's house for the bonfire around 9:30 p.m. While at the bonfire, Ashley had a few drinks before she and Bonilla left around 11:45 p.m. After leaving the bonfire, Ashley indicated she needed to use the restroom, and Bonilla stopped at a Sunoco gas station around 12:04 a.m. on April 4, 2015. At 12:11 a.m., the gas station's surveillance system captured Ashley reentering the vehicle, and the two left a minute later.

Later that morning, Ashley's mother reached out to Ashley's sister because Ashley had not returned from her date the previous night. Once Ashley's sister arrived at the house, the family looked through the phone Ashley shared with her mother for any clues as to her disappearance. In doing so, they found Kik messages between Ashley and a man with the username "E-Money Bon" discussing plans to go to a bonfire the night before. Additionally, they found a message from "E-Money Bon" at 3:29 a.m. that morning, reading "Hello. You still awake? Just making sure you made it home. Sorry I left at the gas station but you were too drunk to handle." Thereafter, the family called "E-Money Bon" from three different phones and messaged him on Kik, but he did not answer or respond. At some point, the family made contact with "E-Money Bon" on Ashley's daughter's phone. "E-Money Bon" identified himself as Edward Bonilla and indicated that he had left Ashley in front of a mobile home park, but he did not know what happened to her afterward.

After communicating with Bonilla, Ashley's family filed a missing persons report with the Dorchester County Sheriff's Office, and provided officers with Bonilla's phone number and screenshots of the messages between Ashley and Bonilla. As part of his investigation, Detective David Harris called Bonilla and advised him that he was looking for a missing person. Bonilla described his night out with Ashley before telling Detective Harris that he left Ashley on the side of the road around 2:00 a.m. after he let her out to use the restroom a second time.

On April 7, 2015, Ashley's missing persons case was assigned to Detective Andy Martin, who made contact with Bonilla and scheduled an interview for the next day.2 On April 8, Bonilla arrived for the interview in his mother's Hyundai Sonata with his mother and girlfriend.3 After Bonilla's mother and girlfriend left to run errands, Bonilla was taken to an interview room. During the interview, Bonilla summarized the events of the night, indicating the last time he saw Ashley was when he left her in front of a mobile home park after pulling over to let her use the restroom. Bonilla further indicated that he was unemployed due to an ankle injury. After the interview, Bonilla showed Detective Martin a shoeprint on the front quarter panel of his mother's Hyundai Sonata and told Detective Martin that Ashley had kicked the vehicle after exiting to use the restroom. Officers and volunteers later combed the area where Bonilla claimed he left Ashley, but they could not locate her.

On April 15, 2015, Detective Martin was contacted by Bonilla's brother's girlfriend, who attended the bonfire on April 3. During their conversation, she revealed that Bonilla was employed at Cauble Flooring in Charleston County. Detective Martin then contacted Robert Cauble, the owner of Cauble Flooring, and confirmed that Bonilla was one of his employees. Cauble also indicated that Bonilla had access to two work vans; a Chevy GMC that he typically worked out of with his brother and a Ford Econoline that the company used as a "floater" van. Detective Martin indicated that he needed to look at the vans in connection with a missing persons case, and the two agreed to meet at Cauble Flooring. Coincidentally, Bonilla called Cauble moments after he got off the phone with Detective Martin and told Cauble that he needed to retrieve his cell phone from one of the vans.

Cauble was the first to arrive at Cauble Flooring and, acting on Detective Martin's inquiry, he pulled up the security footage from April 3 and 4, 2015. The footage from April 3 showed Bonilla and his brother arriving at the end of the work day in the Chevy GMC. However, while Bonilla's brother left in the Chevy GMC, Bonilla left in the Ford Econoline. On the footage from April 4, an unidentified person could be seen returning the Ford Econoline at 10:55 p.m., parking it in the same spot it had been taken from the day before. Additionally, a small car could be seen pulling in behind to pick up the person. Cauble also indicated that Bonilla texted him on April 4 at 4:50 a.m., indicating that he was sick and would not be in to work, and again on April 6, indicating the same.

Once everyone arrived at Cauble Flooring, Detective Martin confronted Bonilla for lying about his employment. Bonilla, in the presence of Cauble, claimed that he had started working at Cauble Flooring on April 14, 2015. However, Cauble indicated that Bonilla had been employed for eight months. Bonilla was charged with obstruction of justice the same day.

After Cauble signed a "consent to search and/or seizure" form, officers searched both vans. While searching the Chevy GMC, officers found Bonilla's cell phone. Upon searching the Ford Econoline, officers discovered multiple red hued stains. Investigator Jeff Scott field-tested four stains, one of which tested "presumptive positive" for blood, and officers arranged to have the van towed to Dorchester County. On the same day, officers located Bonilla's mother's Hyundai Sonata at an Enterprise Rent-A-Car in Charleston County. Records indicated that Bonilla's mother had rented a silver Chevy Cruze on April 4, 2015, at 11:01 a.m.4 The Hyundai Sonata was then seized, in cooperation with the North Charleston Police Department, and towed back to Dorchester County. After seizing the Hyundai Sonata and the Ford Econoline, officers obtained search warrants for both from a Dorchester County magistrate.

On May 5, 2015, Bonilla was charged with murder. On May 8, 2015, he was transported to the Dorchester County Sheriff's Office where he met with his attorney, Mark Leiendecker, in a small conference room. During the meeting, Bonilla provided the location of Ashley's body to Leiendecker and consented to its disclosure.5 On May 9, 2015, after searching the location for two days, police found Ashley's body in a shallow grave in Harleyville.

The trial

Bonilla's case proceeded to trial on August 8, 2016. Prior to trial, Bonilla made several pre-trial motions. First, Bonilla moved to have his statement regarding the location of Ashley's body suppressed, arguing Leiendecker violated Rule 1.6 of the South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct by disclosing the location without Bonilla's informed consent. The circuit court allowed testimony on the issue from Leiendecker and Bonilla. While testifying, Leiendecker took care not to reveal any more confidential discussions between he and Bonilla than necessary to determine the issue of informed consent. Leiendecker testified that he did not know the location of Ashley's body until Bonilla revealed it to him on May 8, 2015, but he asserted that he and Bonilla had discussed the decision to disclose the location in meetings and telephone calls prior to the date of disclosure. Leiendecker explained that disclosing the location of Ashley's body was a key part of Bonilla's defense of accident, as there would be no evidence to corroborate the defense without an autopsy to determine Ashley's cause of death. In discussing potential consequences, Leiendecker told Bonilla that if he disclosed the location of the body, Bonilla would not be able to deny that he knew what happened to Ashley, it would place him at the scene of an alleged murder, and it would open him up to other charges. When the two met on the date of disclosure, they further discussed the issue before Bonilla drew a map to Ashley's body on Leiendecker's iPad. According to Leiendecker, after further discussion, Bonilla consented to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Bauckman v. McLeod
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 31 Diciembre 2019
    ... ... ), The family court has the authority to enforce the provisions of any decree, judgment, or order regarding child support of a court of this State ... This authority includes the right to modify any such decree, judgment, or order for child support as the court considers necessary upon a ... ...
  • State v. Hughes
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 27 Enero 2021
    ...officer's testimony was error, because any error in admitting this testimony would plainly be harmless. See State v. Bonilla, 429 S.C. 253, 285, 838 S.E.2d 1, 17-18 (Ct. App. 2019) ("[A]ny error in failing to determine [the expert's] qualifications and the reliability of his testimony would......
  • State v. Hughes
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 27 Enero 2021
    ... ... chemical is made." ... We need ... not determine whether admitting the officer's testimony ... was error, because any error in admitting this testimony ... would plainly be harmless. See State v. Bonilla, 429 ... S.C. 253, 285, 838 S.E.2d 1, 17-18 (Ct. App. 2019) ... ("[A]ny error in failing to determine [the expert's] ... qualifications and the reliability of his testimony would be ... harmless when considering the overwhelming evidence of [the ... appellant]'s ... ...

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