Commonwealth v. Garcia

1

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LUIS T. GARCIA Appellant

No. 877 EDA 2023

No. J-A14042-24

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

October 30, 2024

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered March 9, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0003846-2021

BEFORE: LAZARUS, P.J., STABILE, J., and LANE, J.

MEMORANDUM

LANE J.

Luis T Garcia ("Garcia") appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed following his convictions for first-degree murder, carrying a firearm without a license, carrying a firearm in public in Philadelphia, and possession of an instrument of crime.^[1] We affirm.

The trial court summarized the underlying facts as follows:

In 2020, [Garcia learned] that the mother of his child had a relationship with [David Sanchez.] According to [Garcia,] he became frustrated when [Sanchez] began texting him about the relationship. During December 2020, [Garcia's] car was shot multiple times just after he left the vehicle. [Garcia] later heard that [Sanchez] and a "crew" he belonged to, called "4200," were responsible for the shooting.

On the night of January 4, 2011, [Garcia] went to a [restaurant] on the 4200 block of North 6th Street [in Philadelphia] looking for someone associated with [Sanchez] and his crew. While [Garcia] was in the [restaurant], the [minor victim, J.C. ("the Victim"),] passed by on his bicycle. [Garcia] believed [the Victim] was associated with [Sanchez] and the 4200 crew and began to follow [him on foot].

. . . According to [Garcia, the Victim], still on his bike, turned around on North Fairhill Street and headed toward [Garcia. Garcia] shot [the Victim] eight times [and fled on foot.] On North Reese Street, a car pulled up and [Garcia] got into the passenger's seat.

Trial Court Opinion, 7/10/23, at 3-4 (record citations omitted). The Victim died as a result of this shooting. Police officers recovered eight nine-millimeter cartridge casings from the scene.

Police detectives obtained surveillance video footage from local businesses which depicted the shooter before, during, and after the shooting. In particular, surveillance video obtained from the restaurant showed a man inside the store wearing black clothing, gloves, and black sneakers with reflectors on the front, and carrying a black fanny pack across his shoulder. However, the man wore a mask and his face was not visible. See N.T. Suppression Hearing, 7/29/22, at 33. Another video showed the same man shoot the Victim. Additional video showed the shooter running on foot and entering a black Subaru with dark tinted windows, trunk spoiler, hood vent, shiny wheels, sunroof, and a white decal on the rear window ("the Subaru"). Detectives were able to track the car's path of travel until it was near the intersection of Sixth and West Sedgley Streets. Detectives could not, however, see the vehicle's license plate number.

The Victim's family informed police officers they heard the shooter lived near 6th and West Sedgley Streets. On January 11, 2022, seven days after the shooting, Philadelphia Police Detective Vincent Parker and his partner were on foot in that area attempting to obtain additional surveillance video. They observed a black Subaru four-door sedan on the 600 block of West Sedgely Street, which had the same features as the vehicle in the surveillance video: dark tinted windows, hood vent, shiny wheels, sunroof, trunk spoiler, and a white emblem on the lower left side of the rear window. As the detectives entered their unmarked vehicle, however, they lost sight of the Subaru. The detectives drove around the area and approximately one hour later and saw the Subaru in their rearview mirror. See id. at 72-73. They called for uniformed patrol officers, who effectuated a stop of the Subaru. Officers took took both occupants into custody - Garcia, the passenger, and Eric Santiago ("Santiago"), the driver - and transported them to the police department for questioning. Furthermore, the officers observed that Garcia was wearing black sneakers with reflectors on the front, resembling those worn by the suspect in the surveillance video. The officers seized Garcia's sneakers, as well as his red iPhone.

That same day, Philadelphia Police Detective Joseph Knoll interviewed Garcia, without initially providing a Miranda^[2] warning. Garcia provided biographical information, including his address - which was also his girlfriend's house - and his girlfriend's name and phone number. However, Garcia refused to "unlock" his iPhone or disclose his phone number. N.T., 8/18/22, at 19-20. At the same time, officers executed a search warrant on the Subaru, where they recovered a fanny pack containing a handgun and Garcia's driver's license.^[3] Upon receipt of this information, during the same interview, Garcia was arrested for possession of the firearm and Detective Knoll advised him of his Miranda rights. Thereafter, Detective Knoll asked Garcia questions about the murder of the Victim the previous week. See id. at 38. Defense counsel argued these questions were intended to elicit inculpatory information about the murder, while Detective Knoll stated Garcia could have merely been a witness to the murder or could have provided information about who was in the Subaru. See id. at 16, 44. Garcia denied involvement and his responses to Detective Knoll's questions were exculpatory. See id. at 48.

Based on the contact information given by Garcia, detectives spoke with his girlfriend, who then provided his telephone number. Detectives also obtained from the probation department a second phone number attributed to Garcia. See id. at 21-22. At this juncture, we note Garcia changed his phone number two days after the murder. See Trial Court Opinion, 7/10/23, at 20. Police detectives thereafter obtained search warrants for: (1) Garcia's girlfriend's house; (2) the contents of his red iPhone; (3) cellphone records for the two phone numbers associated with Garcia; and (4) his DNA. During the search of Garcia's cellphone, police recovered a photograph of the Victim, photographs of Garcia with firearms, and a video of him and other men with firearms referring to themselves as the "4200 killers."

Detectives obtained an arrest warrant for Garcia for the murder. He had been detained since the vehicle stop and submitted to a second interview on January 21, 2021, this time with Detective Parker. Detective Parker informed Garcia he was arresting him for the murder of the Victim, would question him about the murder, and advised him of his Miranda rights. N.T., 8/18/22, at 80. Garcia then confessed to the murder. Both the January 11, 2021 and January 21, 2021 interviews were videotaped.

Garcia filed a motion to suppress the statements he gave in both interviews, as well as all the physical evidence obtained through the search warrants. Garcia also filed a Franks^[4] motion, arguing the Commonwealth intentionally omitted salient information from the affidavits of probable cause for the search warrants. Pertinently, Garcia claimed that Santiago told police: he drove Michael Mercado, known as "C-Mo," to the area of the shooting on the night of the murder and dropped him off for a drug transaction; Santiago drove around the neighborhood; and Santiago picked up C-Mo after C-Mo called him sounding "hyped up." N.T., 9/23/22, at 6-7. However, Garcia averred, in the affidavit of probable cause, the Commonwealth replaced these references to "C-Mo" with the phrase "unknown male," implying that person was Garcia. The trial court conducted three hearings and ultimately: (1) granted suppression of the statements Garcia gave at the first interview before the Miranda warning; (2) denied suppression of Garcia's statements given at the same interview after the Miranda warning; and (3) denied relief on his remaining suppression claims, including his Franks motion.

The Commonwealth charged Garcia with first-degree murder and firearms offenses. The charges proceeded to a jury trial, where Garcia did not testify or call witnesses. Relevant to Garcia's issues on appeal, we note Garcia proposed jury voir dire questions related to the issue of improperly obtained confessions, but the trial court rejected them. Additionally, the trial court admitted a photograph, over Garcia's objection, taken three days after the murder and depicting him holding a firearm. See N.T., 3/8/23, at 13, 128. Finally, Garcia requested a jury instruction on missing evidence, as the Commonwealth could not produce the video of Santiago's first interview with detectives. Id. at 179-80. The trial court denied this request.

The jury found Garcia guilty of first-degree murder, carrying a firearm without a license, carrying a firearm in public in Philadelphia, and possession of an instrument of crime. Immediately thereafter, the trial court sentenced Garcia to a term of mandatory life imprisonment without parole and a consecutive, aggregate term of four and one-half years to twelve years' imprisonment. Garcia did not file a post-sentence motion, but filed a timely notice of appeal. Both he and the trial court complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925.

Garcia raises the following issues for our review:

[1.] Whether the trial court erred as a matter of law and abused its discretion in denying [Garcia's] motion to suppress [his] warrantless arrest and seizure by law enforcement as they lacked probable cause to seize [him], a passenger in a car[,] and confiscate his shoes?

[2.] Whether the trial court erred as a matter of law and abused its discretion in denying [Garcia's] motion to suppress his statements where detectives violated [his] Sixth Amendment and Miranda rights by obtaining a confession using suppressed evidence,

...