United States v. Cozart
| Decision Date | 14 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 3:19-CR-123-RLJ-HBG |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JUSTIN DARRELL COZART, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee |
This case is before the Court, for report and recommendation, on the Defendant Justin Cozart's Motion to Suppress [Doc 36-1]. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). On May 24, 2019 Loudon County Sheriff's Deputy Charlie Huskin was dispatched to arrest Elizabeth Kress, who had an outstanding capias, after law enforcement received a tip that she was at a residence on Dry Valley Road in Loudon, Tennessee. As Deputy Huskin walked up the driveway of the residence, he saw a white Sport Utility Vehicle (“SUV”) with two occupants: Defendant Cozart, who was reclined in the driver's seat, and Ms. Kress in the front passenger seat. Defendant's arm was resting on a long gun inside a soft zippered case, which was lying on the center console. Deputy Huskin directed the occupants out of the car and arrested Ms Kress. Loudon County Sheriff's Investigator Marty Stanley arrived on the scene and saw two guns through the SUV's windows. Investigator Stanley arrested Defendant Cozart based on his knowledge of Defendant's prior felony conviction. Law enforcement then searched the SUV and seized the two guns. Defendant argues that law enforcement violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment by entering curtilage of the property and searching the SUV, both without a search warrant.
For the reasons discussed herein, the Court finds law enforcement's entry onto the property and the search of the SUV comport with the Fourth Amendment. Thus, the undersigned respectfully recommends that Defendant's Motion to Suppress be denied.
This case arises out of the May 24, 2019 search of an SUV, in which Defendant had been sleeping. Based upon evidence seized from the SUV on that day, Defendant is charged with a single count of being a felon in possession of firearms [Doc. 1].
The Defendant asks [Docs. 36-1 & 43] the Court to suppress all evidence gained from law enforcement's warrantless entry onto the curtilage of the residence on Dry Valley Road and warrantless search of the SUV. He argues that officers violated the Fourth Amendment when they left the roadway and entered private property without a search warrant. Defendant maintains that the capias for Ms. Kress did not permit the officer's entry onto the property. He also asserts that the tip of a confidential informant did not provide probable cause or reasonable suspicion that Elizabeth Kress was on the property. Finally, Defendant contends that the automobile exception to the warrant requirement does not apply to the search of the SUV on private property and the officers were not lawfully on the property, so the plain view exception also does not apply.
The Government responds [Doc. 42] that law enforcement lawfully walked up the driveway to conduct a “knock and talk, ” inquiring about a person with an active arrest warrant. It contends that the guns inside the SUV were in plain view as officers executed the arrest warrant for the passenger of the SUV. The Government argues that the officers properly searched the SUV pursuant to the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. It maintains that at the time of the search, the officers had probable cause to believe that evidence of a crime was inside the SUV.
The Court held an evidentiary hearing on the suppression motion on June 29, 2021. Assistant United States Attorney LaToyia T. Carpenter appeared on behalf of the Government. Attorney Russell T. Greene represented Defendant Cozart, who was also present. Following the presentation of evidence and argument, defense counsel asked to file a post-hearing brief. Because defense counsel was starting a lengthy federal trial in early July, the Court set a deadline for posthearing briefs of September 13, 2021, the date requested by defense counsel. No additional briefs were filed in this case, and the Court took the suppression motion under advisement.[1]
The Government presented the testimony of Investigator Charles Edward Huskin and Investigator Marty Stanley, both with the Loudon County Sheriff's Office (“LCSO”).
Investigator Huskin testified that he has been an investigator for the LCSO since November 17, 2020, and before that he was a patrol officer for four years. Before going on patrol, Investigator Huskin worked as a corrections officer at the jail in Loudon County for five years. Investigator Huskin stated that in May 2019, he was directed by a narcotics officer to find Elizabeth Kress, who was believed to be at a residence located at 7900 Dry Valley Road in Loudon, Tennessee. The residence was located in a wooded area and had a long driveway. Investigator Huskin estimated that the driveway was eighty to one hundred yards long, and the house was located on the right side of the driveway. Upon arriving at the residence, Investigator Huskin saw Defendant Cozart and Ms. Kress in a white Ford Explorer.
Investigator Huskin said he noticed “head movement” in the Explorer, walked to the driver's side, and spoke with Defendant Cozart, who was in the driver's seat. He saw Ms. Kress, the woman for whom he was looking, in the passenger seat. Investigator Huskin had both occupants get out of the Explorer. He testified that Ms. Kress had an active arrest warrant, and he planned to take her into custody. He said that he asked Defendant Cozart to step out of the car for officer safety, because he was the only officer on the scene at that time. Investigator Huskin stated that other officers were in route to the residence, so he waited for back up to arrive.
Investigator Huskin said he was wearing a body camera that day, and he identified the video footage from his encounter with Defendant and Ms. Kress [Exh. 2]. Investigator Huskin reviewed the video, stating that he asked Defendant to get out of the car because Defendant's elbow was resting on a firearm. He agreed that less than ten minutes after he first encountered Defendant Cozart in the car, narcotics Investigator Mark Stanley arrived on the scene. Investigator Huskin said he and Investigator Stanley discussed that an individual named Chris Darnell was staying at or renting the residence, which was owned by the Loudon County District Attorney.
The video recording [Exh. 2] shows that Investigator Huskin arrived at the house and parked in the driveway, even with the front of the residence. The front door of the residence was accessible by stairs that began at the driveway and led up to a porch. A white Ford explorer was parked at the top of the driveway, even with the back of the house. Investigator Huskin walked up to the open driver's side window and encountered Defendant partially reclined in the driver's seat and Ms. Kress sitting in the front passenger seat. A gun case was on the center console. Investigator Huskin asked the female passenger if she was Elizabeth Kress. When she responded “yes, ” he asked her to get out of the car because he needed to talk to her. Investigator Huskin asked Defendant to get out of the car, so Investigator Huskin could keep an eye on him. Defendant exited the SUV with his dog and began walking his dog, which was on a leash, in the tree line along the side of the driveway.
The video recording [Exh. 2] shows that Investigator Huskin had Ms. Kress stand by the front of his patrol car. Investigator Huskin radioed that he had Ms. Kress and asked about “the other one.” Another officer replied that Ms. Kress is the only one “we have paper for.” Investigator Huskin told Ms. Kress that they had a “paper” for her and “if it's a good warrant, ” she was going to jail. Ms. Kress stated that she had been out of jail for two days. In response to questioning by Investigator Huskin, Ms. Kress said that the house belongs to Chris Darnell, who just left to go to work, and that no one is inside. During this conversation, Defendant walked his dog across the driveway and toward the front of the house, then into the wooded area at the top of the driveway beyond the SUV.
The video recording [Exh. 2] reveals that approximately four minutes after Investigator Huskin arrived, Corporal Brian Smith arrived and parked behind Investigator Huskin's patrol car. Investigator Huskin told Corporal Smith to keep an eye on Defendant, because Huskin feared the Defendant would throw something into the woods. Ms. Kress told Investigator Huskin that she had been with Defendant since she got out of jail but wanted her best friend to pick her up. After discussing that Ms. Kress was in jail for theft, Investigator Huskin asked her if Defendant was her boyfriend. Ms. Kress said that Defendant was not her boyfriend but agreed he would like to be her boyfriend. Around seven minutes after arriving at the residence, Investigator Huskin put Ms. Kress in the back of his patrol car. One minute later, Investigator Mark Stanley arrived on the scene and parked in the driveway behind Corporal Smith's patrol car.
The video recording [Exh. 2] shows that Investigator Huskin walked down the driveway to meet Investigator Stanley. Investigator Huskin told Investigator Stanley that Ms. Kress was in custody, the residence belonged to Chris Darnell, and that Mr. Darnell had gone to work. Investigator Huskin asked whether the officers would be searching the house. Investigator Stanley replied they would not search it unless Investigator Huskin had seen something in plain view. Investigator Huskin denied seeing anything or looking in the SUV thoroughly. He told Investigator Stanley that while he was talking with Ms. Kress, Defendant had been walking his dog and that Huskin was concerned that Defendant could have disposed of contraband. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial