State v. McLaurin

Decision Date08 November 2022
Docket NumberAC 44523
Citation216 Conn.App. 449,285 A.3d 104
Parties STATE of Connecticut v. Gregory E. MCLAURIN
CourtConnecticut Court of Appeals

Daniel J. Krisch, assigned counsel, for the appellant (defendant).

Nathan J. Buchok, deputy assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, was Margaret E. Kelley, state's attorney, for the appellee (state).

Alvord, Seeley and DiPentima, Js.

ALVORD, J.

The defendant, Gregory E. McLaurin, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of robbery in the first degree with a deadly weapon in violation of General Statutes § 53a-134 (a) (2), conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree with a deadly weapon in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-134 (a) (2), criminal possession of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217, carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General Statutes § 29-35 (a), four counts of unlawful restraint in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-95, and conspiracy to commit larceny in the fourth degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-125. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress a one-on-one showup identification. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following facts, which the jury reasonably could have found, and procedural history are relevant to this appeal. On January 19, 2018, at approximately 8:30 p.m., the defendant and another individual, Royshon Ferguson, entered a Smashburger restaurant on Boston Post Road in Milford. Both men were wearing ski masks, but their eyes, mouths, and the skin around their eyes and mouths were visible. The defendant was carrying a silver-colored, semiautomatic gun in his hand.

There were three employees working at the restaurant that night. Jada Brinkley and Jamal McNeil were working in the front of the restaurant, and Casey Deloma, the shift lead, was in the back room, which was brightly lit and contained a small safe. There were four customers dining in the front of the restaurant. When the defendant and Ferguson entered Smashburger, two of the customers attempted to flee. The defendant pointed the gun at them and told them, "don't run." The defendant then gathered the customers and employees at gunpoint and directed them to the back of the restaurant, where Deloma was located.

Once in the back room of the restaurant, the defendant handed the gun to Ferguson, who pointed it at Deloma and told her to unlock the safe. Deloma attempted to unlock the safe twice using a code, but it did not unlock. Ferguson told her, "I'm going to give you ten seconds or I'm going to shoot you." Deloma entered the code again and opened the safe. Ferguson took the money out of the safe and put it in his pockets. During this time, the defendant was standing in the back room, next to Brinkley.

After taking money out of the safe, Ferguson took Deloma to the front of the restaurant at gunpoint and directed her to open the cash registers. She opened the first register, and Ferguson began to take money from it while she opened the second register.1 The defendant remained in the back room of the restaurant with the other victims. The defendant demanded that the victims give him their cell phones. At that point, one of the customers, Garfield Stewart, who was lawfully carrying a concealed firearm, drew his weapon on the defendant, who immediately took off running. As Stewart gave chase, the defendant ran into the front of the restaurant, past Ferguson, and out the front door. Stewart then pointed his gun at Ferguson, who was bent over a cash register, and started banging Ferguson's hand until he released the gun. Ferguson ran out of the restaurant, exiting within seconds of the defendant. The defendant and Ferguson fled in the same direction, turning right out of the front door and running down Boston Post Road.

At approximately 8:40 p.m., the Milford Police Department received a high priority call that an armed robbery was in progress at Smashburger on Boston Post Road. Three minutes later, Officer Matthew Joy arrived to a chaotic scene and immediately turned on his body camera. As the first responding officer on scene, Officer Joy secured the scene, ensured that no suspects remained on the premises, and determined that the employees and customers were uninjured. Additionally, he located a gun on the floor behind the front counter of the restaurant. After speaking with the employees and customers, Officer Joy learned that two suspects had fled the restaurant on foot, turning right out of the front door. One suspect, later identified as Ferguson, was described as "a black male, about five feet, six inches, heavyset, wearing jeans and a dark colored ... hooded sweatshirt ...." The other suspect, later identified as the defendant, was described as "a black male, approximately six feet, six foot one, a thinner build wearing jeans, a red hooded sweatshirt with a dark colored top coat layer." Officer Joy did not receive descriptions of the suspects’ faces because he was told that they were wearing dark-colored ski masks, one black and one green.

Officer Joy promptly relayed a description of the suspects to his fellow officers over his portable police radio. A passing motorist flagged down police officers responding to the scene and reported that he had just seen two black males run into a wooded area, behind a car dealership and storage facility, that was located approximately 800 feet across the street from Smashburger. At that time of night, there was limited pedestrian activity on Boston Post Road, but there was significant vehicular traffic.

Officer Sean Owens, a canine handler, and his partner, Canine Officer Czar, responded to the wooded area behind the car dealership. It was a cold night, there was some ice on the ground, and the wooded area was dimly lit. Officer Owens casted2 Czar into the general area where the subjects were last seen, and Czar immediately alerted to an apocrine odor, a particular odor that humans emit when they are emotionally charged or fearful. Czar began pulling south along the overgrown grass and wood line that ran between the storage facility and wooded area. Upon reaching the car dealership parking lot, Czar displayed a proximity alert3 and then pulled deeper into the wooded area, toward a marsh, for approximately twenty-five to thirty yards, when Officer Owens saw the first suspect, later identified as Ferguson. Officer Owens, and his fellow officers who were providing backup, gave several verbal commands for Ferguson to get down on the ground and show his hands. Ferguson ignored the officers’ commands and reached for his waistband, which prompted Officer Owens to give Czar a command to apprehend Ferguson. Czar subdued Ferguson with a bite to the leg. Once Ferguson complied with Officer Owens’ commands, Czar was removed, and Officer Christopher Deida detained Ferguson.

Officer Deida searched Ferguson, who told him that he had a knife on his person. Officer Deida located an eight to nine inch kitchen knife in the front pocket of Ferguson's sweatshirt. Additionally, officers found $868 in cash on Ferguson, with many of the bills "hanging out of his pockets." Ferguson told Officer Deida that his friend "jumped the fence" and pointed to a nearby chain-link fence with barbed wire that ran along the wooded area. Officer Deida and another officer moved Ferguson from the wooded area to the parking lot of the car dealership, where the officers had set up a staging area. The officers had called an ambulance to the car dealership, and Ferguson was treated for his dog bite.

At 8:50 p.m., ten minutes after the police received the call regarding the armed robbery, Officer Joy, who had remained on scene at Smashburger, received a radio transmission informing him that a suspect had been apprehended. Sergeant Christopher Dunn,4 Officer Joy's commanding officer, instructed him to conduct an eyewitness showup,5 at the car dealership, with a victim. Officer Joy selected Brinkley because he determined that she had the best view of the robbers. Shortly thereafter, Officer Joy brought Brinkley to the car dealership where she identified Ferguson as one of the robbers, without hesitation and within less than one minute.

Meanwhile, Officer Owens and Czar continued to search for the second suspect. Officer Owens attempted to get Czar back on task, which was difficult because of the excitement surrounding Ferguson's apprehension and the additional personnel in the area whose odor began to contaminate the scene. For twenty to thirty minutes, Officer Owens and Czar continuously tracked within the wooded area, even rechecking certain areas. Czar continued to return and show interest in the marsh area, near where Ferguson was found, and Officer Owens "felt confident that there was somebody else in this area." However, Officer Owens became concerned that Czar was getting tired, and that the scene was overwhelmingly contaminated, so he decided to end the track and return Czar to his vehicle to regroup. As they began to walk back to the vehicle along the back of the storage building, Czar changed his behavior, hooked his head,6 and pulled Officer Owens toward the marsh, deep within the wooded area.

Officer Owens found the second suspect about fifty to sixty yards from where Ferguson was apprehended and in a location "where the dog ... twenty minutes earlier, wanted to kind of get into ...." The second suspect, who was later identified as the defendant, was "hunkered down in head high thickets ... well hidden ... in close proximity to all the noise and everything else going on for the first subject." Officer Owens told the defendant to show him his hands, but the defendant attempted to flee deeper into the woods and marsh. At that point, Officer Owens gave Czar the command to apprehend the defendant, which Czar did with a bite to the lower leg. As the only officer...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • State v. McLaurin
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • January 17, 2023
    ...assistant state's attorney, in opposition.The defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 216 Conn. App. 449, 285 A.3d 104 (2022), is granted, limited to the following issue:"Did the Appellate Court properly uphold the trial court's denial of the defendant's m......

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