Moody v. State

JORDAN MOODY v. STATE OF MARYLAND

No. 2637

COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND

September Term, 2019

February 16, 2021

Circuit Court for Baltimore City

Case No. 119003009

UNREPORTED

Fader, C.J., Wells, Raker, Irma S. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.

Opinion by Raker, J.

*This is an unreported opinion, and it may not be cited in any paper, brief, motion, or other document filed in this Court or any other Maryland Court as either precedent within the rule of stare decisis or as persuasive authority. Md. Rule 1-104 Jordan Moody, appellant, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City of murder in the first degree, use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm after a disqualifying conviction, related to victim Keith Patterson. The jury convicted appellant of attempted first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence related to a second victim, Michael Blue. The jury convicted appellant of reckless endangerment of a third victim, Kushal Sangrula. He presents the following questions for our consideration:

"1. Did the trial court abuse [its] discretion by denying Appellant's motion in limine seeking to exclude testimony from the State's witness, Michael Blue?

2. Did the administrative judge abuse [her] discretion by denying a request for postponement of trial?

3. Did the trial court err by admitting hearsay during the testimony of Kecia Liverpool?

4. Did the trial court abuse [its] discretion by ruling that a recorded telephone conversation was admissible in evidence?

5. Did the court below abuse discretion by denying defense counsel's motion for a mistrial?

6. Is the evidence legally sufficient to sustain Appellant's conviction for attempted first degree murder of Michael Blue and use of a handgun in that offense?

7. Did the court below abuse [its] discretion by denying Appellant's motion for a new trial?"

We shall affirm.

I.

Appellant was indicted by the Grand Jury for Baltimore City for the commission of violent offenses and firearm violations related to three victims, Keith Patterson, Michael Blue, and Kushal Sangrula. The jury acquitted appellant of six offenses¹ and convicted him of first-degree murder of Keith Patterson, attempted first-degree murder of Michael Blue, and reckless endangerment of Kushal Sangrula, along with firearm violations. The court imposed the following sentences: for murder of Keith Patterson, incarceration for life; for attempted murder of Michael Blue, incarceration for life, to be served concurrently; for use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence, twenty years, to be served consecutively; for possession of a firearm after a disqualifying conviction, fifteen years, to be served consecutively; for reckless endangerment of Kushal Sangrula, five years, to be served concurrently.

This case arises from a shooting that occurred in the early morning hours of December 31, 2016, outside the establishment known as Robbie's Nest, 4250 East North Avenue, Baltimore. Richard Beard, an off-duty lieutenant who worked at the Maryland Division of Corrections, witnessed a shooting at that location. He saw a gunman (whom he could not identify) running behind two men, shooting. One man fell to the ground, and the gunman fired a second shot while standing over him. The gunman then fired at another person standing outside of the bar, who yelled, "Whoa, it's me." The gunman fled on foot and Mr. Beard called 911. The victim, Mr. Patterson, died from seven gunshot wounds, two of which injured his heart and major blood vessels.

The State's theory of the case was that the shooting stemmed from an earlier encounter inside the bar over a seat at the bar. Guillermo Contreras, a bartender at Robbie's Nest, testified that he saw customers engaging in a fight and that, after "something" happened outside, a bullet entered the bar — narrowly missing Kushal Sangrula, an employee working at the carryout window. Mr. Contreras called the police, and when they arrived, he showed them video surveillance footage. From the video, Mr. Contreras identified Kecia Liverpool, Keith Patterson and another customer who took Mr. Patterson's seat after he had gotten up. Sometime later, from a photograph, Mr. Contreras identified appellant as the customer who had been in the argument with Mr. Patterson. A crime scene technician photographed the scene and collected twelve spent 9 mm Luger cartridge cases, which a firearms examiner later determined all had been fired from the same gun.

The police interviewed several people. Detective Jonathan Jones, the primary investigator, interviewed a man nicknamed "B-Why" as a suspect because he saw him on the video fighting with and dragging Keith Patterson outside the bar that night. After speaking with him, Detective Jones identified a different suspect: a man portrayed in the video holding a handgun in his left hand, running toward the front of the bar immediately before the shooting, and running away after the shooting, still holding the gun in his left hand. On January 13, 2017, the police released a photograph of this other suspect to the media. Kecia Liverpool, a bar patron and friend of Keith Paterson, gave the detective the name "Early" as the patron who took Keith Patterson's seat at the bar. Then, the case went cold.

On November 15, 2018, Detective Jones received a Metro Crime Stoppers tip indicating that appellant, Jordan Moody, was the person shown in the media photograph. Kecia Liverpool and Guillermo Contreras both identified appellant. Detective Jones determined that appellant was left-handed. Later, while appellant was in custody prior to trial, in a telephone conversation recorded by the jail authorities, a party identified appellant by his middle name, "Earl." Keisha Liverpool² identified appellant as the man who took Mr. Patterson's seat at the bar and who argued with him before the shooting. She knew appellant as "Early."

At trial, Michael Blue testified that Keith Patterson was his older brother. He testified that he met his brother at Robbie's Nest late in the evening of December 30, 2018. He participated in the altercation in which "B-Why" was beaten and dragged out of the bar. Outside the bar, Michael Blue heard gunshots and he ran to escape. Upon returning to the scene, he discovered that his brother was dead.

On the first day of trial, defense counsel moved in limine to exclude the testimony of Michael Blue based upon an alleged discovery violation, i.e., that the prosecutor disclosed the identity of Mr. Blue (a victim and witness), previously listed as "John Doe," fifteen days before trial and disclosed his statement the same day as jury selection. The prosecutor responded that he had discovered the identity of Mr. Blue while speaking with Mr. Patterson's wife prior to trial and that he had sent notice to defense counsel by e-mailthe same day he learned of the witness's identity. He told the court that the witness was located on the night before the first day of trial, served with a subpoena, and then at lunchtime on that first day of trial met with a detective who took a recorded statement from him. Mr. Blue, according to the prosecutor, would testify at trial, but could not identify appellant.

In ruling against defense counsel's motion to exclude Mr. Blue's testimony, the court found no discovery violation and no bad faith on the part of the State. The court explained as follows:

"I don't think the State can produce what they don't have, that it's been timely produced once it was available to the State, and there's nothing based upon what the State has said that makes me believe that there was any bad faith or ill motive or a strategy in strategically not having it until the last minutes, so as to disadvantage the defense."

Defense counsel set out the alleged prejudice to the defense, stating as follows: (1) defense counsel did not have Michael Blue's recorded statement to the detective; (2) defense counsel did not have the opportunity to investigate the background of Mr. Blue; (3) defense counsel could not prepare to cross-examine this witness; and (4) Mr. Blue's expected testimony would "establish facts for the State that otherwise I think could be in dispute." Defense counsel conceded to the court that the prosecutor did not act in bad faith but nonetheless the information should have been turned over earlier. The prosecutor offered to delay calling this witness from Friday to the following Tuesday. The court denied the motion in limine. Defense counsel went to the administrative judge and requested a continuance of the trial, based on the late disclosure of Mr. Blue. On Tuesday, when the State called the witness, counsel renewed his motion. The court noted that defense counsel had met with Mr. Blue on Friday and denied again the motion to exclude the testimony.

Kecia Liverpool testified as a witness, called by the State. On cross-examination by defense counsel, she admitted that she had stabbed Mr. Jamal Carruthers in the stomach during an argument and that their dispute started when Mr. Carruthers accused her as the one responsible for Keith Patterson's death. On redirect, the State asked Ms. Liverpool what Mr. Carruthers had said that prompted her response that day. Over defense counsel's objection that the response would be hearsay, Ms. Liverpool stated "Well, you know, everybody's saying that it's over you."

The State offered evidence, through the testimony of Detective Jones, of a recorded telephone call made by appellant from the jail. Appellant objected on the basis of the timing of the disclosure of the call, calling it a discovery violation, not relevant, unfairly prejudicial because it indicated that appellant was in custody, and cumulative evidence. The judge overruled defense counsel's objection, ruling as follows:

"Well, I'm not convinced that it is so highly prejudicial. I'm not convinced that the jury knowing that, and particularly in this

...