Moore v. State

VERNELL J. MOORE v. STATE OF MARYLAND

No. 83

COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND

September Term, 2020

March 12, 2021

Circuit Court for Worcester County

Case No. C-23-CR-19-271

UNREPORTED

Graeff, Beachley, Eyler, James R. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.

Opinion by Beachley, 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.

The Circuit Court for Worcester County denied appellant Vernell J. Moore's motion to suppress evidence of cocaine found during a traffic stop following a canine alert of his vehicle. After pleading guilty pursuant to an agreed statement of facts, Moore was convicted of possession with intent to distribute, for which he was sentenced to fifteen years.

In this timely appeal raising Fourth Amendment challenges, Moore contends that police lacked reasonable articulable suspicion for the traffic stop, and that they improperly prolonged Moore's detention to conduct a canine scan.¹ For reasons that follow, we disagree and affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Our background summary focuses on the evidence presented at the suppression hearing because, "[i]n a challenge to a ruling on a motion to suppress, we are limited to considering the facts presented at the motions hearing, and we must view those facts in the light most favorable to the prevailing party." Carter v. State, 236 Md. App. 456, 464 (2018) (citations omitted).

On October 2, 2019, Ocean City Police Department Detective Michael Kirkland was in plainclothes, driving his "covert vehicle" in Berlin, when he observed Vernell Moore driving "a black four-door Hyundai Elantra" with a "farm agricultural tag." The detective, who was familiar with Moore from "prior drug investigations," "immediately recognized" Moore while passing that vehicle. Believing that Moore's driving privileges might still be suspended, Detective Kirkland "immediately turned around" in order to follow the Elantra, which proceeded "out to Route 113" and then onto "Route 50 westbound towards the Salisbury area."

Without losing sight of the vehicle, Detective Kirkland radioed to Detectives Shane Musgrave and Zachary Converse, each of whom was also on patrol with the Enforcement Team of the Worcester County Sheriff's Office. Detective Kirkland requested that Detective Musgrave determine the status of Moore's driver's license.

Detective Musgrave was also familiar with Moore as he previously investigated him for drug violations and had arrested him. Using the computer in his unmarked patrol vehicle, he determined that Moore's driver's license in Maryland was revoked and suspended. Detective Musgrave then relayed that information to Detectives Kirkland and Converse.

When Detective Converse spotted Moore's vehicle traveling westbound on Route 50, he was in uniform and driving a marked police vehicle. Having been advised by radio that Detective Kirkland "observed an individual that he knows as Vernell Moore operating a vehicle in the area of Berlin[,]" and that Detective Musgrave "conducted a license andwanted check" that revealed "Moore was revoked and suspended," Detective Converse spotted the identified vehicle by matching its color, make and registration number.

When Detective Converse initiated a traffic stop at 3:24 p.m., Moore eventually stopped on the shoulder of Whaleyville Road. At 3:26 p.m., the detective activated his "e-tick" system, by inputting preliminary information into a computer template, as the first step in issuing a traffic warning or citation. As he approached the vehicle, Detective Converse "immediately recognized" the only occupant as Moore, whom he also knew "through previous investigations." Moore was "a little squirmish" and making "quick movements" "toward his waistband area with both of his hands[,]" like he was "in a hurry to move something."

The detective spoke with Moore "for approximately a minute or two" and obtained his "documents." Moore "advised he did not have a license" but presented a Maryland identification card. At that point, Detective Converse had grounds to arrest Moore for "[d]riving suspended and revoked," so he was not free to leave or to move his vehicle.

At 3:28 p.m., while heading back to his vehicle "immediately after [he] stopped talking to" Moore, Detective Converse radioed for a "drug K-9" unit. In accordance with his typical protocol, the detective began conducting license and wanted checks when he got back into his vehicle. Detective Musgrave arrived as backup at 3:28 p.m.

After receiving a printout of Moore's driving record through the Worcester County Sheriff's Office, at 3:31 p.m., Detective Converse had confirmation that Moore's license was revoked and suspended. The detective began entering into the e-tick system all theremaining information necessary to generate a warning for driving on a suspended license, a process that typically takes five to six minutes to complete as it did in this instance.

Berlin Police Department Corporal Christopher Bireley and his dog Luke arrived at the traffic stop at 3:33 p.m. At that point, Detective Converse was sitting in the driver's seat of his vehicle, "still in the process of checking [Moore's] license, confirming, talking to dispatch, checking the registration." While Detective Musgrave "was getting [Moore] out of the vehicle[,]" Detective Converse "explained to [Corporal Bireley] who was in the vehicle, [and] the reason for the stop[.]" Corporal Bireley and Luke began "an exterior sniff of the vehicle" at 3:34 p.m. The dog made a positive alert within "[t]hirty seconds[,]" at 3:35 p.m. The corporal immediately advised Detective Converse. Moore's vehicle was searched, leading to the discovery of crack cocaine. Moore was placed under arrest at 3:52 p.m. More contraband was later found on Moore's person.

The suppression hearing evidence regarding the traffic stop and canine scan may be summarized in the following 11-minute timeline:

3:24 Detective Converse initiates stop of Moore's vehicle.

3:26 Detective Converse activates e-tick system.

3:24-28 Detective Converse observes Moore making quick movements at his waist area, talks with Moore, obtains documents.

3:28 Detective Converse calls for K-9 unit.

3:28-30 Detective Converse requests/awaits license, registration, and warrant checks.

3:31 Detective Converse prints out Moore's driving record.

3:33 K-9 unit arrives while Detective Converse is still in his patrol vehicle, inputting information into e-tick system.

3:34 After Detective Musgrave removes Moore from his vehicle, canine scan begins.

3:35 K-9 Luke makes a positive alert.

Defense counsel argued that because Detective Converse failed to "provide any factual support . . . that he's making an objective reasonable suspicion determination before pulling over the car[,]" the court could not find that police had "reasonable suspicion that Mr. Moore was engaging in unlawful activity." In addition, counsel raised, as a "second concern," that "the initial purpose of the stop [was] abandoned" to conduct the canine scan.

The prosecutor countered that "the reasonable articulable suspicion . . . is found with Detective Kirkland's testimony" that he observed Moore driving and Detective Musgrave's notification that Moore's license was revoked and suspended. Because Detective Converse was "still not done writing the warning" when Corporal Bireley arrived and conducted the canine scan over "a very short window of time" of no more than ten minutes, there was no improper "elongation of the traffic stop[.]" Moreover, "because the vehicle is clearly there on the side of the road and Mr. Moore doesn't have any ability to drive that vehicle based on [his] license status[,]" the canine scan could and would have been conducted "regardless of what was going on with Mr. Moore[.]"

The circuit court denied Moore's motion to suppress, finding that Detective Converse had reasonable articulable suspicion for the stop based on: Detective Kirkland's report that Moore was driving a motor vehicle with a particular make, model and registration on Route 50; Detective Musgrave's confirmation of Moore's license assuspended and revoked; and Detective Converse's description of the vehicle by location, make, model, and license plate. With respect to the canine scan, the court found that it occurred "during the course of the primary reason for the stop" to investigate whether Moore was driving on a suspended or revoked license. The court reasoned that "[t]he occurrence from start to finish is a very brief period of time." Moreover, "the vehicle wasn't going anywhere" because Moore, the only occupant, could not drive it, so even if the K-9 unit had not arrived as quickly, the vehicle could have been scanned while another deputy was "waiting for a third party to come or waiting for a tow company to come."

DISCUSSION

Moore contends that the suppression court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine seized during the traffic stop as fruit of the poisonous tree. In his view, the stop was initiated on a "mere hunch" based on an eighteen-month-old drug sale, and extended beyond the purpose and length of time reasonably necessary to investigate the suspected traffic offense. We address Moore's contentions in turn, concluding that neither the record, nor the law, supports them.

I. Reasonable Suspicion for the Traffic Stop

Moore argues that Detective Converse lacked reasonable suspicion to make the traffic stop because the detective's "only 'objective observation' before the stop was" that Moore was driving. In his view, Detective Converse lacked reasonable suspicion for the stop because it was predicated on a "mere hunch," which itself arose from a "tainted . . . vendetta" harbored by Detective Kirkland after an eighteen-month-old drug investigation.When Detective Kirkland "relayed that conjecture" to Detective Converse, who then "...