State v. Brown
| Decision Date | 29 August 2018 |
| Docket Number | Appellate Case No. 2017-000094,Opinion No. 27836 |
| Citation | 818 S.E.2d 735,424 S.C. 479 |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. Donte Samar BROWN, Petitioner. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, of Columbia, for Petitioner.
Attorney General Alan Wilson and Senior Assistant Attorney General David Spencer, both of Columbia; and Solicitor Scarlett A. Wilson, of Charleston, all for Respondent.
The central issue before the Court concerns authentication of Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring evidence. Specifically, is the requirement for authentication satisfied by testimony that GPS data is accurate because "[w]e use it in court all the time"? The answer is an unqualified "no."
A Zaxby's restaurant in Goose Creek, South Carolina, was robbed by two males wearing ski masks and gloves while carrying a gun and knife, around midnight on Christmas Eve. During the robbery, a Zaxby's employee was shot by one of the robbers. As a result of law enforcement's investigation—including a traced scent trail, DNA evidence found on a ski mask and gun, an executed search warrant, and a tip that Petitioner confessed to committing the crime with Christopher Wilson—Petitioner and Wilson were arrested and charged with robbery, as well as other crimes stemming from the incident. In addition, during the course of their investigation, law enforcement discovered that Wilson was wearing a GPS ankle monitor at the time of the robbery. Wilson's GPS records reflected that he was at Zaxby's during the robbery. Wilson pled guilty prior to Petitioner's trial.
At Petitioner's trial, the State connected Wilson to Petitioner, through Wilson's GPS records and otherwise. As noted, this appeal is centered on Petitioner's challenge that the State failed to authenticate Wilson's GPS records. We hold that the State failed to properly authenticate the GPS records, and it was error to admit this evidence. Nevertheless, due to the overwhelming evidence of guilt, we affirm the court of appeals in result because this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
A Zaxby's restaurant in Goose Creek was robbed around midnight on December 24, 2011, and an assistant manager was shot during the robbery. There were several employees present at Zaxby's during the time of the robbery who testified at trial. They testified that, while Zaxby's was in the process of being closed for the evening, two men wearing dark clothing, ski masks, and gloves robbed them with a gun and knife. One of the robbers shot the assistant manager as she lay on the ground. In addition, one victim testified that the assailants used a knife to rip his pants and take his wallet from his back pocket.
Within minutes of the robbery, a car narrowly avoided hitting two men dressed in dark clothing who were exiting the woods near Zaxby's, crossing the road, and running along a wooded area. The citizen relayed this information to the law enforcement officers who were gathered at the nearby Zaxby’s. Based on this information, law enforcement utilized a dog from a K-9 unit to track the scent at the entrance of a subdivision across the street and, along the trail, found money dropped at various places before the scent was lost. Law enforcement also discovered a ski mask, which was submitted for DNA testing. The scent trail ended at Wilson's residence. By the time law enforcement arrived in the vicinity of Wilson's residence, the suspects had left the area. The assailants were not apprehended that night.
Marteeka Hamilton—one of Petitioner's on-again, off-again girlfriends—testified that she received a call from Petitioner on Wilson's cell phone around midnight on the night of the robbery, asking her to pick them up near Wilson's residence because they needed a ride.1 Hamilton testified that she picked up Petitioner and Wilson near the entrance of the subdivision around 1:00 a.m. that Christmas Eve. She testified that she overheard Wilson talking on the phone and stating that he had accidentally shot someone. She also testified that Petitioner chimed in and chastised Wilson for shooting the victim. Hamilton dropped them off at the Northwoods Mall a few miles away. Days later, Hamilton visited Petitioner and Wilson at a Motel Six near the mall and saw several shopping bags in the room.
Cynthia Garrett was Petitioner's other on-again, off-again girlfriend. Garrett testified that Petitioner confessed to her that he had robbed Zaxby's with Wilson and she relayed this information to the police. Garrett testified that, prior to the robbery, she offered to provide transportation so Petitioner could accept a job offer, but Petitioner told her that he would "rather rob than work," informed her that he was planning to do a "lick"2 with Wilson, and asked to borrow Garrett's car. Garrett refused to let Petitioner borrow her car. In addition, Garrett knew Petitioner had a gun prior to the robbery and instructed him to remove it from her house. Approximately one week before the robbery, Garrett kicked Petitioner out of her home due to an argument.
On the night of the robbery, Petitioner called Garrett from Wilson's cell phone around midnight asking her to give them a ride.3 Although Garrett was unaware at the time why Petitioner and Wilson needed a ride and Petitioner offered a couple hundred dollars for it, she refused. Garrett testified that Petitioner became angry and hung up the phone. Petitioner then called Hamilton, as discussed above, and she gave Petitioner and Wilson a ride.
Regarding Garrett's tip to law enforcement, the assigned investigator sent officers to the Motel Six where Garrett said Petitioner had stayed after the robbery and they confirmed that Petitioner had checked in there. In addition, the dollar amount that Garrett provided as being stolen during the robbery closely matched the one that law enforcement obtained from management at Zaxby's.
At that time, the assigned investigator submitted the DNA on the ski mask found at the scene for comparison with Wilson's DNA. The forensic test results revealed it was a match. Based upon their advancing investigation—including Garrett's statement and Wilson's DNA on the ski mask—law enforcement obtained a search warrant for Wilson's residence.
While executing the search warrant, law enforcement discovered Petitioner alone in Wilson's house. During their search, officers located the gun used during the robbery.4 In addition, they found a knife matching the description of the one used during the crime and a social security card for one of the victims whose wallet had been stolen during the robbery.
The expert concluded,
While Petitioner was incarcerated and awaiting trial, Lanier Daniels was his cellmate. During this time, Petitioner confessed to Daniels that he planned and committed the robbery with Wilson. In particular, Daniels testified that Petitioner said he was "the one who set up the whole thing" and Petitioner explained to him "what had happened at Zaxby's that night" and "how they got away." Daniels testified that Petitioner said he was upset with Wilson because Wilson shot his uncle's girlfriend—the assistant manager—during the robbery. Daniels testified that Petitioner disclosed "his baby mother"—Hamilton—picked Wilson and Petitioner up after the robbery. Petitioner told Daniels that he was arrested while "he was at a friend's house" and "getting rid of the gun."
In addition, the State entered Wilson's cell phone records at trial, without objection, which reflected that Wilson's phone was used to call Hamilton and Garrett during the time periods that they testified Petitioner had called them and stated that he needed a ride for himself and Wilson on the night of the robbery.
Law enforcement also discovered that Wilson was wearing a GPS ankle monitor and requested the GPS records from the South Carolina Department of Probation, Pardon, and Parole Services (the "Department"). The GPS records, which are the focus of this appeal, purportedly placed Wilson at Zaxby's just prior to and during the time of the robbery. During trial, the State submitted Wilson's GPS records, to which Petitioner objected on the basis that the State was unable to authenticate the records or comply with the business records exception. See Rules 803(6) and 901, SCRE. The trial court overruled the objections and admitted the GPS records.
The State presented Agent Steward Powell's testimony to authenticate the GPS records. Agent Powell testified that he is a probation agent with the Department and explained that his job duties include supervising offenders after they are sentenced. Part of the supervision involves the use of GPS monitoring systems. In particular, concerning the matter of authentication, the following colloquy occurred on direct examination:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Davis
...preliminary Daubert hearing before GPS expert testified; no showing that GPS data product of unreliable method); State v. Brown, 424 S.C. 479, 489, 818 S.E.2d 735 (2018) (noting reliability of GPS technology not genuinely disputed). In fact, some courts have deemed the reliability of GPS da......
-
State v. Warner
...by a witness who claims a report produced by the system is accurate because "we use it in court all the time." State v. Brown , 424 S.C. 479, 487–88, 818 S.E.2d 735, 739–40 (2018) (holding such testimony insufficient to authenticate GPS records). Church went much further than the hapless wi......
-
State v. Green
...438, 444, 710 S.E.2d 55, 57–58 (2011).A. The Requirement of Authentication All evidence must be authenticated. State v. Brown , 424 S.C. 479, 488, 818 S.E.2d 735, 740 (2018) ; 2 McCormick On Evid. § 221 (7th ed. 2016) ("[I]n all jurisdictions the requirement of authentication applies to all......
-
State v. Cox
...convictions due to insubstantial errors not affecting the result." (quoting State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 212, 631 S.E.2d 262, 267 (2006))); id. ("Where 'guilt has been conclusively proven by competent evidence such that no other rational conclusion can be reached,' an insubstantial error t......