US v. Martin
| Decision Date | 15 January 2010 |
| Docket Number | Criminal No. 09-0204. |
| Citation | 679 F. Supp.2d 723 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Cheryl Carothers MARTIN. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana |
Robin Samson McCoy, U.S. Attorneys Office, Shreveport, LA, for United States of America.
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge having been considered, together with the written objections thereto filed with this Court, and, after a de novo review of the record, finding that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is correct and that judgment as recommended therein is warranted,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Suppress Doc. No. 19 filed by Defendant Cheryl Carothers Martin is hereby GRANTED, and all physical evidence discovered in Defendant's car and on her person on August 6, 2009, is SUPPRESSED.
Before the undersigned Magistrate Judge, on reference from the District Court, is a motion to suppress doc. # 19 filed by defendant, Cheryl Carothers Martin. For reasons stated below, it is recommended that the motion be GRANTED.
On August 6, 2009, Trooper First Class Michael Linton ("Trooper Linton" or "Linton") of the Louisiana State Police stopped Cheryl Carothers Martin ("Martin") for a traffic violation on Interstate 20 in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana. Pursuant to the stop, the Louisiana State Police ultimately uncovered over 25 pounds of cocaine located inside of a hidden compartment in Martin's car. On August 27, 2009, a federal grand jury returned an indictment against Martin for her alleged knowing and intentional possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine powder in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). On October 16, 2009, Martin, via counsel, filed the instant motion to suppress the physical evidence that was found in her car and on her person. Following a delay for briefing and an evidentiary hearing held on November 19, 2009, the matter is now before the court.
The following evidence was adduced at the November 19, 2009, hearing held in this matter.1 On August 6, 2009, at approximately 1:45 p.m., Trooper Linton2 observed a 2001 white Pontiac Aztec, with an obscured license plate, eastbound on I-20, near mile marker 101 in Ouachita Parish.3 Specifically, the license plate trim ring obscured the name of the issuing state in violation of Louisiana Revised Statute 47:507.4 Accordingly, Trooper Linton initiated a traffic stop of the Aztec.5 Due to the traffic, as per his custom, Trooper Linton approached the Aztec on the passenger side. Linton observed that the sole occupant was a female driver, later identified as Cheryl Martin.
At the passenger side window, Trooper Linton exchanged greetings with Martin who inquired about the purpose of the stop. In response, Linton asked Martin whether she had her license. He added that he would explain the purpose of the stop after he received her paperwork. Upon receiving Martin's driver's license, Linton asked whether her address was correct. He then proceeded to explain that he stopped her because her license plate ring obscured the issuing state. Martin stated that she had not known that this was illegal, and asked if Linton wanted her to remove the ring. Linton stated that Martin could remove the ring at the next exit. Linton then inquired whether Martin had ever received any tickets "or anything." Martin replied, "no," but then discussed a speeding ticket. Linton inquired whether Martin had ever been arrested, which she denied. Linton then asked Martin where she was coming from. She replied, Bryan, Texas, where she had bought herself a hat. Linton asked her what she was doing down there. Martin replied that she was visiting friends. Linton followed up by asking if she had been down there for a couple of days. Martin said she had gone down for a little vacation, and confirmed that she had been down there for a couple of days. Linton then asked whether Martin stayed with her friends or at a hotel. Martin said that she stayed one night at a hotel and two nights with her friends. Linton asked Martin how long she had known these friends. Martin's response was inaudible on the video. Linton then inquired whether Martin had a good job that would let her go on this trip. Martin replied that she was a landscaper and suggested that her work schedule was flexible.6 At this point, Linton stated, "let me go check your information," and returned to his unit.7
Once back in his car, Trooper Linton expressed to himself, out loud, that he disbelieved plaintiff's story. He contemporaneously recorded his suspicions as follows, 1) Martin visited friends that she had only known for a little while—stayed in a hotel one night and then with her friends for two nights;8 2) she is VERY friendly; 3) she denies any criminal history; and 4) "something's not right with her."9 At the hearing, Trooper Linton further explained that Martin seemed too eager to remedy the traffic violation so she could be on her way.10 He also thought it was odd that she grabbed her hat and shook her head up and down to demonstrate that she had bought a hat, in an exaggerated effort to prove that she had gone shopping in Houston. Linton added that it was odd that she had a sleeping bag in her car if she stayed in a hotel and with her friends. He remarked that she only had one small bag, which seemed incapable of holding more than a single change of clothes and a pair of shoes, that was supposed to last her for three days.11 He also did not see any shopping bags, despite her claim to have gone shopping.
Linton proceeded to run Martin's name and registration on the ThinkStream and MobileCop systems available to him in the car. The searches came back negative. Linton testified, however, that these searches were not definitive, because despite the negative results, he sometimes obtained a hit when the name was run through the office system. Accordingly, at 4:31 on the video, Linton called in Martin's name to dispatch. While this search was pending, Linton began writing a warning ticket for the license plate violation.12 At 8:20, dispatch notified Linton that there was "no record for his subject." Linton then used Microsoft's Trips and Streets program on his laptop to determine whether Martin was taking the correct route between Bryan, Texas and North Carolina. Also during this period, Linton searched Martin's name using her birth name, Carothers. At approximately 9:50, the mapping program revealed that the distance between North Carolina and Bryan, Texas was 1,100 miles. Linton then began to fill out a consent to search form. At 12:30, Linton requested backup from Master Trooper Bruce Robinson. At 13:10, Linton exited his car and re-approached Martin's car.13 By this point, he had already decided to seek Martin's consent to search the car.
Leaning inside the open window of the passenger-side door, Trooper Linton asked Martin at 13:20 whether she had gotten a lot of rain. He then asked Martin how long she had been knowing those folks, and how she had met them. Linton also asked whether all of Martin's family lives in North Carolina. At 13:51, Trooper Linton informed Martin that he was going to give her a warning. Linton explained that Martin did not need to return to his office, and that she could remedy the trim ring issue on her own. At 14:30, as Linton was tearing off the paperwork, he asked Martin, "what did y'all do when you were down there?" He followed up with "y'all went into Houston to shop?" and then "how far is it from Bryan down there?"14 At 14:46, Linton handed Martin her paperwork (license, registration, and insurance) while still questioning her. At 14:50, Linton asked, Martin enthusiastically assented.
Accordingly at 14:56, Linton told Martin that "out here on the highway we deal with good people, bad people, all kinds of things." Martin then interjected with concerns about the passing traffic. At 15:11, Linton asked, Martin said something inaudible before Linton again asked "would it be a problem with me searching your car?" Martin replied something to the effect that the request made her feel "so weird," and why would he want to do that. Linton responded at 15:31, Linton then handed Martin the completed consent form for her to review.
Linton testified that Martin verbally gave her consent to search.15 Meanwhile, Master Trooper Robinson arrived on scene at 15:42. Linton explained the top half of the consent to search form to Martin and stated that by signing the form Martin was allowing him to search the car. However, Trooper Linton did not recite or explain the last sentence of the form which provides that "no promise, threat, or coercion of any kind has been made against me by the Louisiana Office of State Police and I have been informed by the above named State Police officer that I may refuse to consent to any search and that I may revoke my consent to search at any time." (Gov.'t Exh. 2) (emphasis added).16 At no time, did Linton tell Martin that she was free to leave.
At 16:05, Linton told Martin that if she wants to, she "can come back here with Linton and read it back here." Once Martin exited the car (with some difficulty) to the passenger side, Linton told her at 16:52 that he wanted her to read the consent form first. Martin read the form for approximately six seconds, and then signed it. Linton then asked Martin if she had anything on her and whether he needed to have a female officer...
To continue reading
Request your trial