State v. Wade
| Decision Date | 16 November 2022 |
| Docket Number | A-31 September Term 2021,085198 |
| Citation | 252 N.J. 209,284 A.3d 106 |
| Parties | STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Jamal WADE, a/k/a, Jamal Williams, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Steven E. Braun argued the cause for appellant (Bruno & Ferraro, attorneys; Steven E. Braun, East Brunswick, and John Latoracca, Paterson, on the briefs).
Amanda G. Schwartz, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Matthew J. Platkin, Acting Attorney General, attorney; Amanda G. Schwartz, of counsel and on the briefs).
Surinder K. Aggarwal argued the cause for amicus curiae Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey (Stone Conroy, attorneys; Surinder K. Aggarwal, Shalom D. Stone, and Rebekah R. Conroy, on the brief).
In this appeal, defendant Jamal Wade challenges the introduction at his trial of inculpatory statements made to detectives during a custodial interrogation. The parties agree that police violated defendant's Miranda 1 rights by failing to honor his unambiguous request for counsel. The State nevertheless contends that defendant's inculpatory statements were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We conclude that the State cannot meet its heavy burden of proving that this Miranda violation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division.
Because the interrogation should have ended when defendant invoked his right to counsel, we decline to consider whether police coerced defendant's statements or whether misstatements by interrogating police officers render a Miranda waiver per se invalid.
The trial court record establishes that in September 2016, Sergeant Timothy Tabor of the Paterson Police Department (PPD) responded to a report that someone had been shot in Paterson. When he arrived at the scene, Sergeant Tabor found Cosmeik Gee in his car, unresponsive and bleeding from apparent gunshot wounds to his torso. Gee later died from those wounds.
The next day, Lead PPD Detective Anthony Petrazzuolo recovered footage of the shooting from a nearby surveillance camera. This footage showed a dark-colored Audi sedan park next to Gee's car. After the Audi stopped, a man wearing a black jacket over a gray hooded sweatshirt exited the passenger seat and shot Gee several times. The shooter then re-entered the Audi and fled.
Two days later, State Police Detective Sergeant Vittorio Flora of the Auto Theft Task Force (Task Force) contacted PPD detectives with information concerning the shooting. The Task Force had been conducting an unrelated investigation into car thefts in the Paterson area. As part of that investigation, the Task Force obtained a communication data warrant authorizing installation of a GPS tracking device on a black 2012 Audi A6 sedan, which had been reported stolen. The warrant allowed instant and continuous monitoring of the car for thirty days; the shooting occurred during that time.
After learning that a dark-colored Audi sedan had been involved in a Paterson shooting, Sergeant Flora reviewed the GPS data. The data placed the Audi at the scene of Gee's murder and then at a nearby address, where the car remained for approximately seven hours. Detectives recovered the vehicle and obtained additional surveillance footage from where the Audi had parked, which confirmed the GPS data. The footage also revealed that, after parking, the driver and passenger exited the vehicle. The driver wore a gray sweatshirt with a black line across the front and a logo on the chest. He also wore gray sweatpants and black shoes.
The passenger wore a black jacket over a gray sweatshirt, gray sweatpants, and dark shoes. After getting out of the car, the passenger wiped down the exterior doorhandles.
Detectives continued to review the GPS data and found that, before the shooting, the Audi stopped near a local liquor store and did not move for approximately two hours. Detectives recovered surveillance video footage from the liquor store that showed clear images of two men walking away from the Audi and entering the store. Other cameras captured the men walking toward the Audi about two hours later. Although the footage did not show the pair enter or exit the Audi, their clothing and appearances matched those of the driver and passenger shown in surveillance footage from near the murder scene.
When reviewing the liquor store footage, PPD Detective Jimmy Maldonado recognized the driver from prior interactions and identified him as defendant Jamal Wade. PPD Officer Jason English identified the passenger as codefendant Gyasi Allen, who is not a party to this appeal.
At around noon the next day, Detectives Petrazzuolo and Maldonado saw defendant standing outside a convenience store. The detectives pulled over and approached with their guns drawn. They identified themselves as PPD detectives, handcuffed defendant, and told him that he was under arrest for murder. Defendant was brought to PPD headquarters for questioning.
At PPD headquarters, the detectives brought defendant to an interview room. Detective Petrazzuolo stated, and then administered Miranda warnings. Defendant verbally affirmed his understanding and signed a Miranda form, demonstrating that he understood his rights. As Detective Petrazzuolo began to read the waiver-of-rights section out loud, the following exchange occurred:
Notwithstanding that exchange, Detective Maldonado continued with the interview, asking defendant about his whereabouts on the night of the shooting. Defendant admitted that he was at the liquor store on the night of the shooting and identified himself in photographs taken from the liquor store footage. This confirmed Detective Maldonado's identification of defendant as the driver. However, defendant contended that he was at the liquor store until around 2:00 a.m. on the night in question. After the detectives explained that additional footage placed him at different locations throughout the night and connected him to the stolen Audi, defendant stated, The detectives ended the interview and formally charged and booked defendant.
A Passaic County grand jury returned a six-count indictment, charging defendant with second-degree unlawful possession of a weapon, first-degree purposeful or knowing murder, first-degree conspiracy to commit murder, fourth-degree certain persons not to have weapons, second-degree possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, and third-degree receiving stolen property.
The State moved to admit defendant's statements from the interrogation, and the court conducted a hearing to determine their admissibility. At the hearing, Detectives Petrazzuolo and Maldonado testified. Detective Petrazzuolo affirmed that he told defendant he was under arrest for murder before taking him back to PPD headquarters. Detective Petrazzuolo also explained that defendant was arrested based on probable cause, not pursuant to a warrant. Both detectives acknowledged that Detective Maldonado incorrectly told defendant that he was not under arrest when he stated, "No. I didn't say you're under arrest." Instead, Maldonado claimed that he meant to say that defendant had not been charged with anything, but he admitted that neither detective corrected the misstatement.
The hearing judge ruled defendant's statements admissible. The judge found that defendant's age and experiences with the justice system, combined with the detectives’ clear administration of Miranda warnings and the lack of coercion, supported a finding that defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his rights. The judge dismissed Detective Maldonado's misstatement as immaterial because defendant "understood what was going on."
At defendant's trial, the State played a recording of defendant's statements and used a transcript to refresh Detective Petrazzuolo's memory when testifying. The State also introduced expert testimony that, based on defendant's cell phone data, his cell phone could have been in the same location as the Audi at the time of the shooting. In addition, the State presented the surveillance footage described above and defendant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial