United States v. Beasley
| Decision Date | 11 June 2019 |
| Docket Number | CAUSE NO.: 2:18-CR-126-JTM-JPK |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROY MCCARLIN BEASLEY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana |
FINDINGS, REPORT, AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) & (C)
Defendant Roy McCarlin Beasley's Motion to Suppress [DE 15] is before the Court and fully briefed. Beasley frames the question as whether law enforcement "had reasonable suspicion criminal activity was afoot in order to remove [him] from his automobile and thereafter conduct a pat down search." (Def.'s Rep. 1, ECF No. 24).
On May 13, 2019, District Court Judge James T. Moody entered an Order referring this matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for a report and recommendation on the motion to suppress pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). This Report constitutes the undersigned's combined proposed findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). For the reasons discussed below, the undersigned recommends that the motion to suppress be denied.
Specifically, the undersigned recommends that the District Court find no violation of Beasley's Fourth Amendment rights. Beasley's argument that his rights were violated when he was ordered out of his car following a valid traffic stop runs contrary to caselaw. His argument regarding the subsequent pat down turns on facts brought forth at a hearing on the motion to suppress. A careful review of those facts and the totality of the circumstances leading to the pat down show that law enforcement's suspicion that Beasley was concealing a firearm was objectively reasonable and does not call for suppression of evidence.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On August 2, 2018, the State of Indiana filed a four-count complaint charging Beasley with three felony counts, including unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, and one infraction count. Attached to that criminal complaint was a probable cause affidavit sworn to by Lake County Sheriff's Department Detective Alfonso Randle. On November 9, 2018, Beasley filed a motion to suppress. On November 27, 2018, the State of Indiana filed a motion to dismiss.
On November 14, 2018, Beasley was charged in this Court by way of a single count federal indictment charging him with being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Beasley was arrested on this federal charge and had his initial appearance on March 6, 2019. On April 17, 2019, Beasley filed the instant Motion to Suppress, a supporting memorandum, and Detective Randle's probable cause affidavit. The government filed a response on April 30, 2019. Beasley filed a reply on May 3, 2019. The Court held a hearing on the motion on June 5, 2019. The government filed a supplemental brief on June 7, 2019. Beasley did not file a supplemental brief, and the deadline by which to do so has passed.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
According to the probable cause affidavit from Beasley's state charges, on July 31, 2018, at approximately 11:40 p.m. in Gary, Indiana, Detective Randle "clocked" a vehicle traveling 67 miles per hour in a zone marked with a maximum speed of 40 miles per hour. Detective Randle conducted a traffic stop of the vehicle and identified the driver as Beasley by his driver's license. Detective Randle "observed [Beasley's] body movements to be abnormal, as he kept his left hand on his left front pants pocket, while using his right hand to pass his license and vehicle information across his body." (Probable Cause Aff. 1, ECF No. 17). Two additional detectives, Detectives Anderson and Fertig, arrived to assist, and Detective Randle asked Beasley to exit the vehicle.Detective Randle asked Beasley if there were any weapons or narcotics inside the vehicle and received a negative answer. Detective Anderson then performed an outer clothing pat search and discovered a handgun in Beasley's front waistband.
Detective Randle testified at the June 5, 2019 hearing on this matter, further developing the factual record. Detective Randle's demeanor during the hearing suggests he was doing his best to recount the facts as accurately as he could remember them. Though Beasley's counsel conducted effective cross-examination and even obtained a concession, which, read out of context, could call into question Detective Randle's truthfulness, the Court finds Detective Randle credible.
Detective Randle has significant law enforcement experience, having spent seven years as a police officer and six more years working for the Lake County, Indiana jail. More recently, in January of 2018, he started working for the Lake County Sheriff's Department High Crimes Unit, which operates in certain areas of Lake County known for violent crimes, narcotics sales, and gang activity. Detective Randle was patrolling an area of Gary, Indiana, known as the "Bronx" when he conducted a traffic stop on the car Beasley was driving.
After approaching Beasley's vehicle, Detective Randle testified that he stood directly behind the front driver's side door and asked the driver, Beasley, to roll down the car's window. Beasley used his left hand to roll down the car window. After rolling down the window, Beasley placed his left hand on his pants and held it there tight against his body. Beasley's left hand would remain in this location, at times unnaturally so, from this time until Beasley was told to put his hands on his head after being ordered out of the vehicle.
The exact placement of Beasley's left hand was inquired into at great length at the hearing. On direct examination, Detective Randle described the placement of Beasley's left hand as being on his waist area, pants area, and his pocket area. On cross-examination, Detective Randle firstdescribed Beasley's left hand as being on his waist area and specifically noted that it was between his pocket and his waist area. Defense counsel then examined Detective Randle as to statements in the probable cause affidavit and incident report, in which Detective Randle described the placement of Beasley's hand as "on his left front pants pocket." In these documents, Beasley's waistband is not mentioned. On further cross-examination, Detective Randle testified that his earlier statements contained in the probable cause affidavit, which defense counsel characterized as claiming Beasley's left hand was on his pocket, were true. Defense counsel's cross-examination led Detective Randle to say that his statements at the hearing, which defense counsel described as being that Beasley's hand was in his waistband, were not true. However, defense counsel's cross-examination leading to this "admission" that one of the statements was not true was based on the false premise that Detective Randle's hearing testimony was inconsistent with his previous report and affidavit. Detective Randle was asked which of the "pockets" statement and the "waistband" statement was true and which one was false. He was not asked if both were true.
Nothing in Detective Randle's testimony was inconsistent with his earlier report or probable cause statement. Defense counsel conducted a very effective cross-examination, but even he later agreed that Detective Randle had said that Beasley's hand was at his waistband and not in his waistband. This is significant because, arguably, a hand cannot be both in a waistband and over a front pocket. Given the proximity of many front pockets to the end of a waistband, however, a hand can be on both a front pocket and the waistband. The statements Detective Randle made at the hearing—that Beasley's hand was on the pants, pocket, and waist areas—are all consistent, as a hand can be positioned in a way to cover all of these areas. Detective Randle demonstrated such a position, which he testified was where Beasley positioned his hand.
On redirect examination, Detective Randle affirmed that he was testifying truthfully at the hearing. Detective Randle clarified that, while sitting, Beasley's left hand looked like it was on the pocket area and that, while standing, the hand transitioned to the waist area. Detective Randle also testified that, when seated, pockets generally connect to the waistband area. Detective Randle demonstrated where Beasley's hand was placed while seated. The thumb of the hand was at the waistband, and the rest of the hand extended to the pocket.
Detective Randle testified that he asked Beasley for his license, and Beasley reached over with his right hand to the passenger seat, fumbled through paperwork and miscellaneous items with that hand, and retrieved his license. Beasley did not transfer the paperwork to his lap, or use both hands to look through it. Using only his right hand, Beasley passed the license to Detective Randle—who was still standing behind the front driver's side door. When Detective Randle requested the vehicle registration, Beasley leaned his upper body over, without turning his body, to go through the glove compartment with his right hand. The one-handed shuffling through papers, keeping the left hand stationary while the rest of the body was freely moving, and reaching across the body and over the far shoulder with the right hand instead of using the closer left hand were all noted and led Detective Randle to become suspicious that Beasley was concealing a weapon of some sort. Beasley's right hand was also slightly shaking as he passed his license to Detective Randle.
Detective Randle suspected that Beasley was concealing a weapon with his left hand, and he asked Beasley to exit the vehicle. Beasley reached across his body with his right hand to open the driver's side door instead of using his left hand. Upon exiting the vehicle, Beasley immediately turned to face in the direction of the vehicle and away from Detective Randle.
Beasley's left hand remained in the same position from the time directly after Beasley rolled down the window to after he exited the car and Detective Randle asked Beasley...
To continue reading
Request your trial