State v. Crowson
| Docket Number | M2021-00321-CCA-R3-CD |
| Decision Date | 27 May 2022 |
| Parties | STATE OF TENNESSEE v. VINCENT EDWARD CROWSON, JR. |
| Court | Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
Session April 13, 2022
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. 79939 David M. Bragg, Judge
Following a bench trial, the trial court found the defendant, Vincent Edward Crowson, Jr., guilty of driving under the influence (count 1), driving while his license was suspended because of a conviction for driving under the influence (count 2) possession of a weapon while under the influence of a controlled substance (count 4), being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (count 5), driving while his license was suspended because of a conviction for driving under the influence, second offense (count 6), and driving under the influence, second offense (count 7). The trial court imposed an effective twenty-year sentence, and the defendant appealed. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions, the constitutionality of the felon in possession of a firearm statute, and several pre-trial rulings of the trial court. After reviewing the record and considering the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Tenn R. App. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Circuit Court Affirmed
Drew Justice, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, for the appellant, Vincent Edward Crowson, Jr.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Richard D. Douglas, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Jennings H. Jones, District Attorney General; and Brent Pierce, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
J. Ross Dyer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Jill Bartee Ayers and John W. Campbell, Sr., JJ., joined.
J. ROSS DYER, JUDGE
Facts and Procedural History On February 18, 2018, Tennessee Highway Patrol Trooper Chris Langley initiated a traffic stop of the defendant in Rutherford County, Tennessee. Prior to the stop, Trooper Langley saw the defendant cross over the fog line on Interstate 24. The defendant was driving a red Chevrolet Silverado which matched the description of a stolen vehicle provided in an active "be-on-the-lookout" ("BOLO"). Trooper Langley followed behind the defendant for several miles, activated his dashcam video, confirmed the defendant was driving a stolen vehicle, and initiated a traffic stop. During the stop, Trooper Langley located a pistol on the defendant's person and needles in the vehicle. The defendant also admitted to using heroin when he passed Trooper Langley on the interstate.
A Rutherford County grand jury indicted the defendant for driving under the influence (count 1), driving while his license was suspended because of a conviction for driving under the influence (count 2), possession of drug paraphernalia (count 3), possession of a weapon while under the influence of a controlled substance (count 4), being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (count 5), driving while his license was suspended because of a conviction for driving under the influence, second offense (count 6), and driving under the influence, second offense (count 7). Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-17-425, -1307, -1321; 55-10-401, -50-504. The defendant filed several pre-trial motions, each of which the trial court addressed during a hearing on March 17, 2020.
In support of his Ferguson[1] motion, the defendant argued his case should be dismissed because "all of the relevant dashboard video - critical evidence to the case - has been deleted." The defendant asserted the video was deleted "either with extreme negligence or with outright intent" and "there is no other evidence of DUI apart from the incident that occurred on video." At the hearing, the defendant presented testimony from Trooper Langley who described the events leading up the traffic stop of the defendant.
While "sitting in the median" on Interstate 24, Trooper Langley saw the defendant drive past him in the left lane "doing 70." The defendant crossed the fog line, and Trooper Langley began following the defendant in order "to watch his driving behavior." As a result, Trooper Langley's dashboard camera was activated.
In addition to the defendant's driving behavior, Trooper Langley noted the red Chevrolet Silverado driven by the defendant matched a stolen vehicle described in an active BOLO. Trooper Langley called dispatch to confirm that the vehicle driven by the defendant was the stolen vehicle identified in the BOLO. During the dispatch call, Trooper Langley asked if the stolen vehicle's license plate contained a "7." The dispatch operator stated that it did not but verified the license plate of the vehicle driven by the defendant as the stolen vehicle identified in the BOLO. Trooper Langley continued following the defendant for several miles. After the defendant exited the interstate and pulled into a gas station, Trooper Langley initiated the traffic stop.
According to Trooper Langley, the dashcam video captured his pursuit of the defendant and the traffic stop. The portion of the dashcam video that captured the traffic stop was successfully pulled from the server. However, the portion of the video that captured the pursuit had not yet been successfully pulled from the server. The dashcam video of the traffic stop was entered into evidence along with an audio recording of Trooper Langley's dispatch call. The defendant also submitted an audio recording of Trooper Langley's testimony from the defendant's preliminary hearing.
The State presented testimony from Kevin Kennett, the Administrative Sergeant for the Nashville District of the Tennessee Highway Patrol. In that role, Mr. Kennett fulfilled requests for video footage from the L-3 server system used by the department at the time of the defendant's traffic stop. Mr. Kennett explained video footage is saved first on the county server before being saved on the agency server for 90 days, "depending on what categorized issue it is." If an officer logs a video as an "arrest" or a "significant event," the video will be saved on the agency server before being downloaded to a disk. In this case, Trooper Langley categorized the video at issue as an "arrest," thus ensuring it would be saved to the agency server and not deleted after 90 days.
Mr. Kennett reviewed three screenshots from his computer showing his attempt to locate the dashcam video at issue. The screenshots were entered into evidence and showed that the dashcam video was categorized as an "arrest" and was "broken up into three different sections" based upon the size of the media file. The video file related to the traffic stop of the defendant was successfully saved. However, the two video files which captured Trooper Langley's pursuit of the defendant were corrupted. Mr. Kennett confirmed the corrupted video files were saved as a "significant event" and were not deleted; however, they failed to successfully download from the L-3 server. Mr. Kennett explained that he had seen this file corruption happen before and that it was not out of the ordinary. And, although he did not personally take any steps to resolve the corruption issue, the Tennessee Highway Patrol recently changed from the L-3 server system to a new cloud system.
The defendant also filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained during the traffic stop, including the pistol and needles found during the search of the vehicle and the statements he made to Trooper Langley regarding his drug use. In support of his motion, the defendant argued he was unlawfully seized and was not properly Mirandized during the stop. During the hearing, the State asked the trial court to incorporate by reference Trooper Langley's Ferguson-hearing testimony along with the hearing exhibits. The defendant also testified in support of his motion.
The defendant admitted to driving the red Chevrolet Silverado on February 18, 2018. While driving on Interstate 24, the defendant saw Trooper Langley parked in the median. At the time, the defendant was not under the influence and was driving in the right-hand lane. The defendant did not recall crossing over the fog line. According to the defendant, Trooper Langley would not have been able to see his license plate at the intersection of Interstate 840 and Interstate 24 but believed Trooper Langley would have been able to see the license plate as he exited Interstate 840 onto Murfreesboro Road, noting Trooper Langley was "a couple of car lengths behind" him at that point. During cross-examination, however, the defendant admitted that he did not know what Trooper Langley saw while following behind him on the interstate. The defendant also testified that he was not Mirandized at the scene.
The defendant admitted to being convicted of one count of vandalism in Cheatham County and several counts of aggravated burglary in Davidson County. The defendant explained he went on a "crime spree" in Davidson County. Thus, the aggravated burglary convictions were the result of "one occasion, one arrest." The defendant denied being convicted of any felonies in Georgia, providing instead that he was "bound over and made bond" in Georgia and was unaware of any pending charges in that state. The defendant admitted to a pending theft charge in Cheatham County related to the stolen vehicle involved in this case.
In his final pre-trial motion, the defendant moved to dismiss the felon in possession charge of count 5. The defendant argued Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-1307 was unconstitutional because it "violates his right to bear and especially to 'keep,' firearms." The defendant asserted "[b]ecause the statute at hand...
To continue reading
Request your trial