Bradley v. State

1

John C. Bradley III, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.

No. 23A-CR-202

Court of Appeals of Indiana

November 28, 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 Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision is not binding precedent for any court and may be cited only for persuasive value or to establish res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

Appeal from the Allen Superior Court Trial Court Cause No 02D04-2104-F4-27 The Honorable David M. Zent, Judge

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Donald C. Swanson, Jr. HallerColvin PC Fort Wayne, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Theodore E. Rokita Attorney General of Indiana Courtney Staton Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis Indiana Amanda Layne Martin-Nelson Certified Legal Intern Indianapolis, Indiana

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Pyle, Judge.

Statement of the Case

[¶1] John C. Bradley III, ("Bradley") appeals, following a jury trial, his conviction for Level 4 felony possession of methamphetamine.^[1] Bradley argues that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence the methamphetamine found in Bradley's coat pocket by an ICU nurse when Bradley had been in the hospital's ICU and the nurse had been documenting Bradley's belongings. Specifically, Bradley contends that the search by the nurse constituted a warrantless search and violated his constitutional rights under the federal and state constitutions. Concluding that the alleged constitutional provisions are inapplicable because the nurse was acting as a private citizen and not a state actor when she searched and seized the methamphetamine from Bradley's coat pocket, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

[¶2] We affirm.

Issue

Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence the methamphetamine found in Bradley's coat by an ICU nurse.

Facts ^[2]

[¶3] On February 20, 2020, Bradley was transferred by ambulance to the ICU at Parkview Regional Medical Center ("the hospital") in Allen County. Bradley had previously been at an emergency room in a hospital in a neighboring county. When Bradley arrived at the ICU, he was dressed in a hospital gown, and his clothes were transferred along with him on the stretcher.^[3]

[¶4] Upon Bradley's arrival, ICU registered nurse, Ellen Silva ("Nurse Silva"), began conducting the hospital's admission process for incoming patients, which included documenting Bradley's identifying information, medical history, current medications, primary contact information, and emergency contact information.^[4] The hospital's admission process also required Nurse Silva to document Bradley's belongings. The documentation process, which was done for every incoming patient, was done for "safety" and "liability" reasons, and it provided the patient with an opportunity to secure any valuables. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 128).

[¶5] When Nurse Silva informed Bradley that she had to document his belongings, Bradley was "very hesitant[.]" (Tr. Vol. 2 at 142). Bradley "told [her] no, no, no, don't worry about that" and that she "d[id]n't need to do that." (Tr. Vol. 2 at 132). The manner in which Bradley responded made Nurse Silva "feel uneasy" and "uncomfortable[,]" and she went to get another nurse to join her in Bradley's room. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 132, 140). Nurse Silva "reassured" Bradley that the documentation process was for "safety" reasons, and she then started looking through Bradley's coat. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 132). When Nurse Silva reached into Bradley's coat pocket, she discovered a plastic baggie containing a white powdery substance. Later lab testing determined the substance to be 17.32 grams of methamphetamine. Nurse Silva placed the baggie on a glove on a countertop and notified a hospital security officer, Larry Wiggins ("Officer Wiggins"), who was a law-enforcement officer with the hospital. Nurse Silva kept the baggie in her view until the officer arrived.

[¶6] When Officer Wiggins arrived at Bradley's hospital room, Nurse Silva pointed to the baggie of methamphetamine, and the officer took the baggie. Thereafter, Officer Wiggins told Bradley that he was going to search Bradley's belongings. Officer Wiggins and another officer further searched Bradley's coat and discovered another baggie that contained a smaller amount of a white powdery substance, which later testing revealed it to be 0.14 grams of methamphetamine.

[¶7] In April 2021, the State charged Bradley with Level 4 felony possession of methamphetamine. Thereafter, in June 2021, the trial court released Bradley on bond pending trial.

[¶8] In November 2021, Bradley filed a motion to suppress the two baggies of methamphetamine found in his coat, which included the baggie found by Nurse Silva and the second baggie found by Officer Wiggins. Bradley argued that the two baggies of methamphetamine were "searched for and seized by law enforcement authorities" and that the State's search and seizure of the drugs constituted an improper warrantless search that violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. (App. Vol. 2 at 30).

[¶9] The trial court then held a hearing on Bradley's motion. During the hearing, Nurse Silva explained that she had looked in Bradley's coat as part of the hospital's policy to document patients' belongings and that she had not done it to benefit law enforcement. Officer Wiggins testified that he had been working in his capacity as a police officer when he had conducted his own search of Bradley's coat and had seized the smaller baggie of methamphetamine. The State argued that the trial court should not suppress the methamphetamine found by Nurse Silva because the testimony showed that she had not been acting as a state actor when she had searched Bradley's coat, rendering his constitutional arguments misplaced. In regard to the second baggie of methamphetamine found by Officer Wiggins, the State argued that the officer had been acting under exigent circumstances at the time he went into Bradley's room. The State also argued that Nurse Silva's discovery of the first baggie of methamphetamine had given the officer probable cause to believe that Bradley had illegal substances on him and to conduct the subsequent search of Bradley's coat.

[¶10] The trial court issued an order in which it denied the motion to suppress in part and granted it in part. Specifically, the trial court denied Bradley's motion to suppress the methamphetamine found by Nurse Silva and granted his motion to suppress the methamphetamine found by Officer Wiggins.

[¶11] In October 2022, the State filed a motion to revoke Bradley's bond. Specifically, the State alleged that Bradley had been arrested for Level 6 felony possession of methamphetamine and Class C misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia in August 2022 in an unrelated case. The trial court revoked Bradley's bond.

[¶12] The trial court held a one-day jury trial in November 2022. At the beginning of the trial, the parties discussed the fact that the smaller baggie of methamphetamine that had been found by Officer Wiggins was not at issue and that only the larger baggie of methamphetamine found by Nurse Silva was relevant. Bradley informed the trial court that, as part of his defense, he had planned to continue his objection raised in the suppression hearing to the legality of the search conducted by Nurse Silva. The trial court overruled Bradley's objection and granted him a "standing objection" for "the duration of this trial" to the methamphetamine found by Nurse Silva. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 56-58).

[¶13] The State presented testimony from Nurse Silva and a forensic scientist from the Indiana State Police Lab. Nurse Silva testified about finding the baggie inside Bradley's coat pocket, and the forensic scientist testified about the weight and identification of the methamphetamine contained in the baggie found by Nurse Silva. Nurse Silva also testified that, while the intake documentation process of a patient's belongings was done for every newly admitted hospital patient, that same documentation was not typically done for a patient in an emergency room because the patient was usually released that same day. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 146).

[¶14] Bradley's defense was that he did not know how the methamphetamine had gotten into his coat and that his coat had not remained in his possession. Bradley testified that he did not put a baggie of methamphetamine in his coat pocket and that he "ha[d] never done that before in [his] life." (Tr. Vol. 2 at 164). He also testified that his personal belongings had not been transported with him to the hospital and that he had not seen his coat at the hospital until the day he was discharged, which had been three to four days after he had been admitted. The jury found Bradley guilty as charged.

[¶15] During Bradley's sentencing hearing, the trial court noted that Bradley was seventy years old, had congestive heart failure, was on disability, and was "going to kill [him]self if [he] ke[pt] using meth[.]" (Tr. Vol. 2 at 200). The trial court sentenced Bradley to eight (8) years with 100 days executed and as time served, seven (7) years and 265 days suspended, and two (2) years on probation.

[¶16] Bradley now appeals.

Decision

[¶17] Bradley argues that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence the methamphetamine found in Bradley's coat pocket by Nurse Silva when she had been documenting Bradley's belongings. Specifically, Bradley contends that the search by Nurse Silva constituted a warrantless search and seizure and violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1 Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

[¶18] The admission and exclusion of evidence falls within the sound discretion of the trial...