United States v. Palmer
| Decision Date | 22 April 2021 |
| Docket Number | 1:20-cr-379-MKV |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOVAL PALMER, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Defendant Joval Palmer, a convicted felon, is charged in a four-count Indictment with committing a gunpoint robbery and carjacking. Before the Court are Palmer's pre-trial motions (1) to dismiss the Indictment for violation of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161-62 (Mot. Dismiss ("MTD") [ECF No. 45]); (2) to suppress statements made to law enforcement (Mot. Suppress Statements ("MTS-S") [ECF No. 47]); and (3) to suppress physical evidence, specifically a handgun and box of ammunition (Mot. Suppress Evidence ("MTS-E") [ECF No. 49]). For the reasons discussed below, each of Palmer's motions is DENIED.
According to the Complaint, on August 22, 2019, at approximately 2:30 p.m., a livery cab driver picked up a passenger in the Bronx, New York. (Compl. ¶ 7.a [ECF No. 1].) The passenger asked to be driven to a certain location in the Bronx. (Id.) Upon arriving at that location fifteen minutes later, the driver turned around to see the passenger pointing a gun at him. (Id. ¶ 7.b.) Thepassenger demanded that the driver exit the vehicle, which the driver did. (Id.) The passenger entered the driver seat and drove away. (Id.)
According to the Complaint, the vehicle was equipped with a GPS tracker and a mechanism that enables the owner to remotely disable the engine from starting. (Id. ¶ 7.c.) The driver promptly alerted his employer of the robbery. (Id.) The employer then activated the mechanism to disable the engine from starting and began tracking the vehicle. (Id.) At approximately 3:15 p.m., the vehicle came to a stop in New Rochelle, New York. (Id. ¶ 7.d.)
According to the Incident Report of the New Rochelle Police Department, law enforcement responded to the location of the vehicle, a public parking lot, at approximately 3:40 p.m. (New Rochelle Police Dep't, Incident/Investigation Report ("Incident Report") 4 [ECF Nos. 48-1, 50-1] (Reporting Officer Narrative).) Upon arrival, Officer Trangucci observed the vehicle in a parking space with the hood open and Mr. Palmer standing next to it. (Id.) Officer Trangucci approached Palmer, who immediately asked Trangucci if he had jumper cables. (Id.; Compl. ¶ 7.d.) Trangucci asked Palmer if the vehicle was his, and Palmer responded, "Yes, this is my car." (Incident Report 4.)
The Incident Report alleges that Mr. Palmer sprinted away through the parking lot as other officers arrived. (Id.; id. at 10 (Case Supplemental Report); Compl. ¶ 7.e.) Palmer led police on an extensive footchase before he was apprehended. (Incident Report 4, 10; Compl. ¶ 7.e.) Police located the keys to the car under a deck staircase where Palmer had attempted to hide. (Incident Report 4, 10; Compl. ¶ 7.e.) Police also found a box of 9mm Luger ammunition in the front passenger seat of the vehicle. (Incident Report 4; Compl. ¶ 7.f.) Police searched the area with a K-9 but did not locate a handgun. (Incident Report 10; Compl. ¶ 7.f.)
The Incident Report alleges that Mr. Palmer was transported to police headquarters where he was read his rights. (Incident Report 4.) Police officers explained to Palmer how they knew that the vehicle was stolen. (Id.) Palmer allegedly stated that he stole the vehicle because it was left running with the keys inside. (Id.)
According to the ATF Report of Investigation, ATF agents searched the area where Palmer was apprehended in search of the handgun on December 12, 2019. (U.S. Dep't Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Report of Investigation ("ATF Report") 1 [ECF No. 50-2].) No handgun was recovered. (Id.) On March 10, 2020, New Rochelle police recovered a loaded, black Glock 9mm pistol, which had been discovered by a gardener in the bushes of the front yard of a residence where the footchase had occurred. (Id.) The owner of the residence contacted police, stating that she knew police had been searching for a firearm in connection with a foot pursuit several months ago. (Id. at 2 (Reporting Officer Narrative).)
The parties explain that the pistol and the box of ammunition remained in the custody of the New Rochelle Police Department until they were produced to an ATF agent on May 27, 2020. (MTS-E 3; Opp. 13.) The items were entered into ATF custody on June 3, 2020. (MTS-E 3.)
On October 25, 2019, Mr. Palmer was taken from state custody into federal custody based on the Complaint, which charged him with Hobbs Act robbery, using a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and carjacking. (Compl. ¶¶ 1-4.) That same day Palmer was appointed counsel (Order Appointing Counsel [ECF No. 4]) and appeared before a magistrate judge (Minute Entry: Initial Appearance [ECF No. 5]).
[Redacted] On July 23, 2020, a grand jury returned a four-count Indictment charging Palmer with (1) Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 2 (Count One); (2) use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, specifically the Hobbs Act robbery in Count One, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i)-(ii) and 2 (Count Two); (3) being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), and 2 (Count Three); and (4) being a felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), and 2 (Count Four). (Indictment 1-3 [ECF No. 19].)
Leading up to the Indictment, various magistrate judges granted applications for continuances submitted by the Government, extending the deadline to indict under the Speedy Trial Act, most of which admittedly were consented to by Palmer's former counsel. Two continuances are specifically contested. First, on November 27, 2019, two days after the then-applicable deadline to indict, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger granted the Government's application for a continuance dated November 21, 2019. (Order Continuance Nov. 2019 [ECF No. 7]; App. Continuance Nov. 21, 2019 [ECF No. 6].) Second, on April 24, 2020, Magistrate Judge Netburn granted, over Palmer's objection, the Government's application for a continuance given the extraordinary circumstances presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. (App. Continuance Apr. 2020 [ECF No. 15]; Order Continuance Apr. 2020 [ECF No. 15].)
Palmer has raised issues concerning the speedy trial clock and his representation multiple times during this case. Palmer filed a letter dated March 29, 2020, expressing dissatisfaction with his attorney and requesting that the case be dismissed because he had been in custody for five months without having been indicted. (Def.'s Letter Mar. 2020 [ECF No. 14].) Thereafter, Magistrate Judge Moses granted a request by Palmer's attorney to be relieved as counsel and to have substitute counsel be appointed in his place. (Endorsed Letter [ECF No. 16].)
Palmer also inquired with the Court about the thirty-day indictment deadline under the speedy trial clock during his arraignment on August 7, 2021. (Tr. Arraignment 24:8-24:16 [ECF No. 26].) When advised that the time to indict had been extended several times on consent by his former counsel, Palmer insisted that he never had given his personal consent to counsel. (Id. at 24:17-25:5.) [Redacted] Mr. Palmer's attorney then cut him off, advising Palmer not say anything further on the record and that he and counsel discuss the issue in private. (Id. at 25:7-25:19.) The Court madeclear at that time that if there were any issues, counsel should raise them with the Court and the Court would schedule a hearing. (Id. at 25:24-26:5.)
Mr. Palmer later filed a letter dated August 13, 2020, requesting that his attorney be relieved and that new counsel be appointed. (Def.'s Letter Aug. 2020 [ECF No. 25].) Palmer's counsel joined in the request. The Court granted this request and directed new counsel, Palmer's current counsel, to confer with Palmer and advise the Court if Palmer intends to file any motions related to Speedy Trial Act issues or otherwise. (Order [ECF No. 28].)
Palmer now moves to dismiss the Indictment under the Speedy Trial Act, to suppress his statements to law enforcement, and to suppress the handgun and ammunition. The Government opposes the motions. Palmer filed a reply only with respect to his motion to suppress the handgun and ammunition. (MTS-E Reply [ECF No. 61].)
Palmer moves to dismiss the Indictment under the Speedy Trial Act on the ground that the Government failed to indict him within thirty days of his arrest. (MTD Br. 1 [ECF No. 46].) Palmer argues that he never consented to any continuance agreed to by his former counsel and that the November 2019 continuance was untimely. (MTD Br. 3-4.) He also objects to the April 2020 continuance, granted over his objection, by reason of COVID-19-related restrictions. (Id.)
The Speedy Trial Act provides, in relevant part, that any "indictment charging an individual with the commission of an offense shall be filed within thirty days from the date on which such individual was arrested or served with a summons in connection with such charges." 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b). If a defendant is not indicted before the thirty-day clock expires, the charges "shall bedismissed or otherwise dropped." Id. § 3162(a)(1); see United States v. Gaskin, 364 F.3d 438, 451 (2d Cir. 2004).
The Speedy Trial Act excludes from the thirty-day clock as a matter of law certain periods of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1). The statute specifically excludes any "delay resulting from any pretrial motion, from the filing of the motion through the conclusion of the hearing on, or other prompt disposition of, such motion." Id. § 3161(h)(1)(D). "[T]he term 'motion' generally means '[a]n application made to a court or judge for...
To continue reading
Request your trial