United States v. Hayes
| Decision Date | 21 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 21-cr-00069-CJW |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MELCHIZEDEK ROBIN HAYES, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................3
II. FINDINGS OF FACT ....................................................................................................4
III. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................11
a. Whether Family Members Acted at the Behest of the CRPD ....................................................................................................14
b. Whether it was Foreseeable that Mr. Richards Sr. Would Enter Defendant's Home Uninvited ....................................................................................................16
c. Whether CRPD Officers had the Authority to Make a Warrantless Initial Entry into Defendant's Home ....................................................................................................19
i. Apparent Authority ....................................................................................................19
ii. Exigent Circumstances ....................................................................................................25
d. Whether Lt. Wibe's Search Exceeded the Scope of the Richards's Private Search ....................................................................................................28
i. Whether Lt. Wibe's Search that Mirrored the Richards's Search was Constitutional ....................................................................................................30
ii. Whether Seizure of the Contraband from the Bathroom Violated Defendant's Fourth Amendment Rights ....................................................................................................33
IV. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................41
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 10, 2021, the Grand Jury charged Defendant Melchizedek Robin Hayes with one count of Possession of a Firearm by a Prohibited Person, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sections 922(g)(1), 922(g)(9), 921(a)(3), 921(a)(4), and 924(a)(2), and one count of Possession of a National Firearms Destructive Device Not Registered to Possessor, in violation of 26 U.S.C. Sections 5841, 5861(d), and 5871. (Doc. 2.)
The matter before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Suppress. (Doc. 50.) The Government timely filed a response. (Doc. 54.) The Honorable Charles J. Williams, United States District Court Judge, referred the motion to me for a Report and Recommendation. I held a hearing on Thursday, March 31, 2022. (Doc. 55.)
At the hearing, the following Government exhibits were admitted without objection:
1. Audio of 911 call (Gov. Ex. 1);
2. 2010 Real Estate Sales Contract for the home where Defendant resided (Gov. Ex. 2);
3. Lt. Dominic Wibe's body camera video (Gov. Ex. 3); and
4. Grand Jury testimony of Michael Richards Sr. (Gov. Ex. 4).
Defendant objected to the admission of Government Exhibits 5 and 6 on the basis of relevancy. The Government explained that Exhibits 5 and 6, criminal complaints and accompanying records for second degree theft and domestic assault charges, were being offered for the limited purpose of establishing that the officer who responded to the scene of this matter had prior involvement with Defendant and knew who he was. Government Exhibits 5 and 6 were admitted for that limited purpose.
Defendant's Motion to Suppress contained an Inventory of Items to be Suppressed. (Doc. 50 at 1.) Defendant's exhibits were admitted without objection:
1. Officer Kaczinski's body camera (Def. Ex. A); 2. Officer Asplund's body camera (Def. Ex. B);
3. Officer Moyle's body camera (Def. Ex. C); and
4. Lt. Dominic Wibe's body camera (Def. Ex. D).
The Government called one witness, Lt. Dominic Wibe of the Cedar Rapids Police Department. Defendant called one witness, Michael L. Richards. I found both witnesses credible. For the following reasons, I respectfully recommend that the District Court deny Defendant's Motion to Suppress.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
Beginning in December 2020, Michael L. Richards (“Mr. Richards Sr.”) and his wife Lynette (“Ms. Richards”) (collectively “Defendant's parents”) had concerns about Defendant's declining mental health. (Gov. Ex. 4 at 6.) Mr. Richards Sr. and Ms. Richards are Defendant's parents.[1] (Id. at 4.) Defendant had become paranoid, thought people were following him, began missing work, engaged in criminal behavior, and at one point, led police on a high-speed chase as he tried to outrun his perceived pursuers that resulted in him crashing his car. (Id. at 5-8.) He eventually lost his job. (Id. at 6.) In April 2021, Defendants' parents filed mental health commitment papers regarding Defendant because he expressed suicidal intent since his career was gone, his car was gone, and “his life was in shambles.” (Id. at 7-8.) However, Defendant was released from one mental health facility after a few days and walked away from another one before he ever received treatment. (Id. at 9-10.) On May 18 and 19, 2021, Defendant stated that he had made his peace with God and “basically it was, ‘I may as well just blow myself up.'” (Id. at 8.)
On May 19, 2021, Mr. Richards Sr. noticed that the door to Defendant's house was open, which was unusual. Mr. Richards Sr. knew Defendant was not at home because he saw him leave with Ms. Richards to go to the driver's license station. (Richards Hr'g Test.) Defendant lives directly across the street from his parents on the southeast side of Cedar Rapids and usually keeps his house locked because he has expensive computer and electronic music equipment. (Id. at 8-9.) This concerned Mr. Richards Sr. because of Defendant's recent suicide threats. Mr. Richards Sr. does not have a key to Defendant's house, but entered the house through the open door to conduct “what's commonly referred to as a welfare check.” (Id. at 9.) Michael A. Richards (“Mr. Richards Jr.”), [2] Defendant's brother, entered Defendant's house with Mr. Richards Sr. (Richards Hr'g Test.) They found Molotov cocktails under the sink in Defendant's bathroom. (Def. Ex. D at 1:43:37 p.m.)
Mr. Richards Sr. called 911 and explained that his son, the occupant of the home and Defendant in this case, was committed by a judge due to mental health issues for being a danger to himself and others, was released after five days, had “deteriorated seriously, ” and now had all the materials-gasoline, bottles, and rags-for making Molotov cocktails and was “getting ready to take action.” (Gov. Ex. 1 at:30-:59.) Mr. Richards Sr. said he was in the house because his family owned the house and that Defendant was currently walking home from the Department of Transportation on the southwest side of town. (Id.)
When officers arrived on the scene, they encountered Mr. Richards Sr. who appeared to lead them directly into the home. I note that there appears to be little or no discussion about the authority Mr. Richards Sr. might have to enter the home before they follow him in. At the very beginning of Lt. Wibe's body camera video, Mr. Richards Sr. can be heard (with some difficulty) stating, “Our family lives across the road.” (Gov. Ex. 3 at 1:43:10.) Lt. Dominic Wibe of the Cedar Rapids Police Department (“CRPD”) was the first officer to enter the house with Mr. Richards Sr. CRPD Officer Kaczinksi arrived separately and entered the house at about the same time. At 1:43:28 p.m., Mr. Richards Sr. entered the house before Lt. Wibe and led the officers into the house. (Def. Ex. D at 1:43:28 p.m.) Once inside the house, Mr. Richards Sr. stopped in the living room where Mr. Richards Jr. was waiting. The following conversation took place beginning at 1:43:35 p.m.
To continue reading
Request your trial