State v. Wilson

678 S.W.3d 692

STATE of Missouri, Respondent,

v.Marqus Andrew WILSON, Appellant.

WD 85247

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Opinion filed: October 24, 2023

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PLATTE COUNTY, MISSOURI, THE HONORABLE THOMAS FINCHAM, JUDGE

Nathan J. Aquino, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.

Frederick J. Ludwig, Jefferson City, MO, for Appellant.

Division Four: Gary D. Witt, Chief Judge, W. Douglas Thomson, Judge and Andrea R. Vandeloecht, Special Judge

W. DOUGLAS THOMSON, JUDGE

Marqus Andrew Wilson ("Wilson") appeals his conviction of robbery in the first degree following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Platte County ("trial court"). Wilson raises two points on appeal. He first claims the trial court erred in failing to sustain his motion to suppress evidence and statements obtained incident to his arrest ("motion to suppress") because law enforcement did not have probable cause to arrest and subsequently interview him, as law enforcement only had an anonymous tip corroborated only by a tentative witness identification directing them to Wilson. Wilson’s second point on appeal asserts the trial court erred in. overruling his motion for new trial because he was denied due process and a fair trial due to the State’s suppression of material evidence favorable to Wilson, specifically a video-recorded interview of his co-defendant ("Co-Defendant"). We affirm.

Factual and Procedural. History¹

[1] In the early morning hours of October 30, 2018, a robbery was reported at a Waffle House located in Platte County, Missouri. Two suspects, one armed with a gun and the other a knife, had entered the business, demanded money, and then fled; DNA evidence, a shell casing, and a bullet fragment were recovered from the scene. Law enforcement was also provided surveillance footage of the robbery by Waffle House.

The day after the robbery, law enforcement received an anonymous tip from Crime Stoppers. The tip "provided a possible suspect of Marqus Wilson, provided his date of birth, provided his home address, stated that he was living with his mother." The tip also named two other suspects, Suspect 2 and Suspect 3. Additionally, the Facebook pages of Wilson and Suspect 3 were provided. Wilson’s Facebook account went by the name "Suqrm Nosliw," (which was almost his name spelled backwards) while Suspect 3’s went by "Crack Mike."

A second anonymous tip from Crime Stoppers was received three days later on November 3, 2018. This tip provided Facebook photographs of the previously-named individuals. Through a comparison of the tipster-provided photograph of Wilson and a Missouri Department of Revenue ("DOR") photograph, law enforcement confirmed both photographs were of Wilson. The photographs of the other individuals were also verified through a similar comparison to known photographs in the police database.

Also provided by this tip were screenshots of Facebook messages between the "Crack Mike" and "Suqrm Nosliw" accounts. Included in these screenshots was a conversation shortly before the robbery, where Suspect 3 stated he needed money and "was going to see but [sic] mugging someone." Wilson had responded "me, too, let’s link[,]" followed by a reply from Suspect 3 stating "well, in a little, ‘cause still thinking about what we should do, Town Topic or Waffle House." Wilson had replied he was "ready whenever[.]" Messages from after the robbery were also included in the screenshots, wherein Suspect 3 stated "look up Waffle House, I tried ditching car because it has your DNA but cops have got it …." Suspect 3 also told Wilson he may "go to prison, cops are hot[.]" The messages further mentioned a "felony," that a "gun was shot in the store," and not wanting to go down for fourteen or fifteen years "on a dope-ass car ride"

Law enforcement then took formal statements from two victims of the robbery, Waffle House Employees 1 and 2. Employee 1 described both suspects as "younger, early 20s, the one with the gun was taller, a little bit taller. The One with the knife … was shorter." She stated their faces were covered, but not entirely, and explained "how the one with the gun appeared more calm for some reason but … the one with the knife was acting crazy, jumped on the booth." Employee 1 recounted how the latter suspect had waved the knife at her, and described the knife as "pointed to a triangle like a dagger and serrated." The surveillance footage supported Employee 1’s story. While Employee 1 was unable to identify Wilson when presented with a photo lineup, Wilson’s appearance was consistent with her description of the suspect with the knife based on identifiers she provided. Accordingly, Wilson was not eliminated as a suspect.

Employee 2 was later interviewed and her story of the robbery was also consistent with the surveillance footage:

She stated they walked in, she didn’t Think it was a real gun, she wanted to act tough, the suspects demanded money, she said you’re going to have to shoot me. Then the suspect armed with the gun literally shot in the store and then she said she got really scared and basically hid down and then ran away.

Employee 2 was also shown a photo lineup: "She immediately pointed to [Wilson] and her wording was something along the lines of, you know, I’m not saying that I recognize someone but if I had to choose someone it would be him and he was the one armed with the knife."

An "investigative arrest order"² was subsequently issued for Wilson, leading to his arrest on November 21, 2018 at the same address provided by the first anonymous tip. After being Mirandized, Wilson waived his rights and agreed to speak to law enforcement. He then gave a video-recorded interview. When shown photographs of the Facebook accounts of Suspect 3, Suspect 2, and his own, he identified each individual’s accounts. He also confirmed the "Crack Mike" and "Suqrm Nosliw" accounts were Suspect 3’s and his Facebook account names, respectively.

While initially denying that he exchanged Facebook messages with Suspect 3, he ultimately confirmed he had the conversations with Suspect 3 before and after the robbery as depicted in the screenshots received in the second anonymous tip. Wilson ultimately confessed to his involvement in the robbery, stating it was him and Co-Defendant, not Suspect 2 as had originally been thought. However, he minimized his role in the robbery, stating he was forced into participating. Wilson was held in custody until an arrest warrant was issued the following day, and he was charged with one count of the class A felony of robbery in the first degree.

On April 9, 2019, Wilson filed his motion to suppress "any and all evidence and statements obtained as a natural consequence of [his] … unlawful detention and arrest," as well as "any and all evidence concerning any and all alleged statements, whether oral, written, videotaped, or otherwise recorded, which the state intends to use against [Wilson.]" The basis for the motion was Wilson’s claim that there was no probable cause to detain and arrest him due to the lack of reliability and corroborating information concerning the anonymous tips. He therefore argued his arrest and subsequent interrogation violated his United States and Missouri constitutional rights.

A hearing on the motion to suppress was held on May 3, 2019. The sole witness at the hearing was the case detective assigned to investigate the robbery, who recounted the above-described investigative steps that led to the arrest and interview of Wilson. The case detective also testified he conducted his own computer checks, to verify the provided information. He first verified the date of birth provided for Wilson through DOR, then compared the provided Facebook photographs to known photographs through "some sort of booking system or DOR to verify that they were the same people." After matching the photographs, including those of Wilson, the case detective testified he conducted the interviews of Employee 1 and Employee 2. He also reviewed the surveillance footage, which depicted a suspect armed with a knife. He testified he then "had enough for an investigative arrest order[,]" and Wilson was detained a few days later. After hearing additional argument from counsel, the trial court denied the motion to suppress.

Jury trial commenced on October 18, 2021 and concluded on October 21, 2021. During direct examination of the case detective, the State sought to introduce State’s Exhibit 4 ("Exhibit 4"), the redacted version of Wilson’s video-recorded interview. Upon the State’s offering of Exhibit 4 into evidence, defense counsel stated, "No objection to this version of the recording." The trial court received Exhibit 4 into evidence "without objection" and Wilson’s interview was played for the jury. Additionally, at multiple points during the case detective’s testimony, including during cross-examination, details from an interview of Go-Defendant were discussed.

Wilson testified in his own defense. He provided his own version of the robbery, stating that Co-Defendant forced his involvement. Wilson testified that on the night of the robbery, Co-Defendant picked him up at 2:00 AM. Wilson testified he assumed they would drive around for awhile or go back to Co-Defendant’s house, but they instead pulled into a parking lot adjacent to and behind the Waffle House. Wilson testified Co-Defendant pulled out a firearm and asked Wilson if he wanted to rob the place. He stated, he thought Co-Defendant was joking, but Co-Defendant got "deadly serious," pointed the gun at Wilson, and asked him if he thought it was a joke. Co-Defendant then reached into the back seat, grabbed a hoodie and a knife, threw them in. Wilson’s lap, and told him to tie the hoodie around his face, all while pointing the gun at him. Co-Defendant then yanked him out of the car at gun point and escorted him around the back of the Waffle House. Wilson claimed he only robbed the Waffle House armed with a knife "due to being in fear...