Blackwell v. State

1

Timothy Deshay Blackwell, Appellant-Defendant, v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff

No. 22A-CR-2677

Court of Appeals of Indiana

July 24, 2023

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision is not binding precedent for any court and may be cited only for persuasive value or to establish res judicata, collateral estoppel, or law of the case.

Appeal from the Hendricks Circuit Court The Honorable Daniel F Zielinski, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 32C01-2011-F2-38

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Stacy R. Uliana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Theodore E. Rokita Indiana Attorney General Evan Matthew Comer Deputy Attorney General

MEMORANDUM DECISION

ALTICE, CHIEF JUDGE.

Case Summary

[¶1] In this discretionary interlocutory appeal, Timothy Deshay Blackwell appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress a statement he gave to police following his arrest. He raises the following two restated issues:

I. Did police have probable cause to stop and arrest Blackwell?

II. Did Blackwell knowingly and voluntarily waive his Miranda rights under the Indiana Constitution where law enforcement read Blackwell his rights and he acknowledged that he understood them but law enforcement did not thereafter obtain an express waiver of rights from him?

[¶2] We affirm.

Facts &Procedural History

[¶3] On the morning of November 13, 2020, Indiana State Police (ISP) Trooper Brad Smith stopped a commercial semi-tractor trailer hauling private vehicles on Interstate 70 in Hendricks County for an inspection. Based on criminal indicators he observed, and after speaking with the driver and reviewing his paperwork, Trooper Smith became suspicious about a Corvette that was on the transport. Trooper Matthew Wilson's certified narcotics K-9 officer circled the trailer and gave a positive alert to the Corvette, which was searched after receiving consent from the driver hauling the vehicles. Four pounds of cocaine and ten pounds of methamphetamine were discovered in a false compartment. Trooper Wilson applied for and received a GPS warrant allowing placement of a tracking device on the Corvette, which was being hauled to ADESA, an auto auction facility in Plainfield. Officers placed some of the seized drugs inside the Corvette, which was loaded back on the trailer for delivery to ADESA.

[¶4] Police called the phone number listed on the paperwork for the Corvette to confirm delivery, and when the transport arrived at ADESA, Blackwell was present to receive the Corvette. Surveillance officers observed Blackwell exit his vehicle and pay the transport driver. Around this time, a flat-bed tow truck arrived and loaded up the Corvette. Officers followed as the tow truck, along with Blackwell in his own vehicle, left ADESA and headed east. The tow truck pulled into an address on Gladstone Avenue in Indianapolis, where the Corvette was unloaded. Meanwhile, Blackwell, who a local detective working with ISP recognized and identified from previous experiences, pulled into the driveway of his residence, which was "very close in proximity" to the Gladstone address. Transcript at 11. When Blackwell left his residence a few minutes later in his vehicle, Trooper Wilson stopped him. Blackwell was arrested and taken into custody "for taking delivery and possession [] of" the drugs that were in the Corvette. Id. at 8.

[¶5] Blackwell was transported to an ISP Post for questioning. At the start of the recorded interview, ISP Sergeant Taylor Shafer asked Trooper Wilson whether Blackwell had "been Mirandized already" during his arrest, and Trooper Wilson answered in the affirmative. Exhibit 1 at 1:25. Sergeant Shafer then said to Blackwell, "I'm just gonna go ahead and do this again even though you've already been [Mirandized] once" and thereafter verbally read Blackwell his Miranda rights from a card that Sergeant Shafer was holding in his hand. Id. at 1:29.

At the end of the advisements, Sergeant Shafer asked Blackwell if he understood, and Blackwell replied, "Yes." Id. at 1:55. At that point, Wilson and Shafer began the interview, which Metro Drug Task Force Detective Brian Stewart later joined. Initially, Blackwell stated he went to the car auction to pick up a vehicle for a friend and knew little about it, but he eventually admitted to paying the car hauler, signing someone else's name on the paperwork for receipt of the Corvette, paying the tow truck driver, knowing that drugs were inside the vehicle and, on more than one occasion, taking delivery of drugs that were concealed in vehicles.

[¶6] On November 16, 2020, the State charged Blackwell with Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine (Count 1) and Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine (Count 2). In January 2021, the State added a habitual offender charge.^[1]

[¶7] On March 16, 2022, Blackwell filed a motion to suppress, asserting that he was "illegally seized" in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution as the police had no reasonable suspicion to stop and detain him. Appendix at 135. He argued that he committed no crime, traffic infraction, or ordinance violation and should have been free to leave. He also argued that, while in custody, police "illegally obtained" statements from him in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 14 of the Indiana Constitution because they questioned him without properly advising him of his Miranda rights. Id.

[¶8] On August 1, 2022, the court held a hearing on the motion to suppress. Trooper Wilson testified consistent with the above, and Blackwell's videorecorded interview was admitted into evidence. Trooper Wilson testified that Blackwell had committed a crime at ADESA when he received and made payment to the driver of the transport for the Corvette that had drugs in it, and that officers had probable cause to stop and arrest him for possession of the drugs.

[¶9] Blackwell argued that the police lacked reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop in Marion County, as all he did was pay a transport driver to haul a vehicle to Hendricks County, and he was never in possession of the Corvette or drugs. He further asserted that, even if the court determined that the stop was valid, his statements should be suppressed because he was not asked whether he was willing to waive his rights. Thus, according to Blackwell, the State did not prove that he voluntarily and intelligently waived his rights.

[¶10] The State responded that Trooper Smith observed Blackwell receive and pay for - and thereby "take possession of" - the Corvette that contained cocaine and methamphetamine, and thus probable cause existed to stop and arrest him. Id. at 18. With regard to Blackwell's challenge to his Miranda warnings, the State maintained that, under Indiana law, there is no requirement that an officer explicitly ask the individual if he is waiving his rights and, rather, the inquiry is whether the person's waiver of rights was voluntary under the totality of the circumstances.

[¶11] After taking the matter under advisement, the trial court issued an order on August 17, 2022, denying Blackwell's motion to suppress. The court found that ISP had probable cause to stop and arrest Blackwell because it had been previously established that the Corvette - which Blackwell had "arrived to pick up" at ADESA - was concealing cocaine and methamphetamine. Appendix at 95. With respect to the Miranda warnings, the court found:

Defendant clearly was advised of his [M]iranda warnings, and Defendant acknowledged that he understood his rights.

Defendant was not coerced to make any statements. It is clear Defendant understood his rights, and waived those rights when giving statements to the arresting officers.

Given the totality of the circumstances, the Court finds Defendant's statements were voluntarily made after having been advised of his constitutional rights[.]

Id.

[¶12] Blackwell filed a motion to certify the order, therein identifying the issues to be addressed on interlocutory appeal:

a. Whether under the Indiana Constitution, the State [met] its burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt Blackwell knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights when law enforcement did not ask Blackwell whether he was waiving them or present him with a written waiver.

b. Whether evidence Blackwell paid to retrieve a car that was shipped from out of state constituted probable cause to arrest him for possession of the drugs that were found inside of it, even though he never took physical possession of the car.

Id. at 100. The trial court granted Blackwell's motion, and we accepted jurisdiction. Blackwell now appeals.

Discussion &Decision

[¶13] An appellate court reviews the denial of a motion to suppress similar to other sufficiency matters. Isley v State, 202 N.E.3d 1124, 1129 (Ind.Ct.App. 2023), trans. denied. We must determine whether substantial evidence of probative value exists to support the trial court's decision. Id. We do not reweigh evidence, and we construe any conflicting evidence in favor of the trial court's decision. Id. (quotations omitted). However, we consider any substantial and uncontested evidence favorable to the defendant. Marshall v. State, 117 N.E.3d 1254, 1258 (Ind. 2019) (internal quotations omitted). "[W]ithin this sufficiency review, we review all issues of law de novo." Hartman v. State, 988 N.E.2d 785, 788 (Ind. 2013).

I. Probable Cause

[¶14] Blackwell asserts that his confession was "a direct product of his illegal detention" such that the trial court should have suppressed it. Appellant's Brief at 24. More specifically, he maintains that his arrest^[2] was not supported by probable cause.^[3]

[¶15] A warrantless arrest is permissible under the ...