Case Law United States v. Brooks

United States v. Brooks

Document Cited Authorities (16) Cited in Related

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS

ANNIE T. CHRISTOFF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court is Defendant Rodney Brooks's Motion to Suppress, filed May 5, 2023. (ECF No. 30.) The United States responded in opposition on May 18, 2023. (ECF No. 35.) District Judge Mark S. Norris referred the motion to the undersigned for report and recommendation on May 12, 2023. (ECF No. 31.)

The Court held a hearing on July 7, 2023. (ECF No. 43.) At the hearing, the United States called one witness, Detective Gary Williams, and introduced into evidence two exhibits: a disc containing a video file of an interview (Exhibit 1) and an advice-of-rights form (Exhibit 2). Brooks called three witnesses, Officer Malcolm DeWitt Smith, Jr., Officer Russell Cathey, and Sergeant Richard Hilliard, and introduced into evidence three exhibits: a disc containing a video file from a body-worn camera (Exhibit 3), a Memphis Policy Department (“MPD”) policy statement (Exhibit 4), and a disc containing another video file from a body-worn camera (Exhibit 5).

Following the hearing, the parties submitted additional briefing based on new theories raised by Brooks at the hearing. Brooks filed a supplemental brief on July 14, 2023 (ECF No. 44), the United States filed a response to that supplement on July 28, 2023 (ECF No. 47), and Brooks filed a reply to the supplement on August 2, 2023 (ECF No 48).

After careful consideration of the statements of counsel, the testimony of the witnesses, the evidentiary exhibits, and the entire record in this case, the Court recommends that the motion be denied.

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT

Officers Smith and Cathey are MPD officers with the Tillman Station taskforce. Officer Smith has worked for the MPD for twenty-one years. He testified that it is MPD policy to advise a person of their Miranda rights once they are in custody. (See Exhibit 4.)

On May 5, 2022, Officers Smith and Cathey, along with other officers, were called to 962 Hudson Street in Memphis Tennessee, to apprehend Brooks, a suspect in connection with a carjacking on April 26th. Brooks had previously been identified, along with Casey Schmuck, by the victim's girlfriend as responsible for the carjacking. The victim's girlfriend was a close friend of Brooks and was in contact with Brooks to try to get the victim's items back, and she had provided investigators with Brooks's possible location at 962 Hudson. Brooks and Schmuck were identified by the MPD as persons of interest on April 29th. Schmuck was suspected of having the victim's shotgun in his possession.

Officers Smith and Cathey were wearing body-worn cameras, which recorded the interaction. (See Exhibits 3 and 5 respectively.) As shown in those recordings, at approximately 10:06 a.m., the officers approach Brooks in a detached garage next to the home. Brooks is standing with an electric razor in his hand and a towel over his shoulder, next to a chair and another person. Multiple witnesses testified that Brooks was cutting someone's hair when the officers approached. Officer Cathey immediately handcuffs Brooks and walks him to the patrol car, where he is patted down. Officer Cathey asks Brooks if he knows what this is about, and Brooks says no. During the pat-down, Officer Cathey locates a “kit box” in Brooks's pocket, which Officer Cathey offers to throw away. Brooks also describes the other items in his pockets, including a pen and a toothpick. As Officer Cathey continues to search Brooks, Brooks asks for a cigarette.

Officer Cathey sits Brooks down in the backseat of the patrol car, with the door open. Officer Smith then walks up and asks Brooks, “where Casey at, man?” Brooks responds that he has not seen Schmuck since a day or two after “the incident that I guess that's what y'all have got me for.” Brooks says that he saw Schmuck at the Z Market, which is where Schmuck hangs around, and that his grandmother lives on Print Street. Officer Cathey testified that he asked Brooks about Schmuck's location because they were trying to apprehend both suspects.

Officer Smith asks Brooks if he has had a hit today, and Brooks says yes, that morning. Officer Smith says that he hopes Brooks can “kick that shit,” and Brooks responds, “this is the part of that mission, to help me kick that shit.” Officer Cathey then lights a cigarette for Brooks. Officer Smith testified that he asked Brooks about taking drugs because the victim's girlfriend, a long-time friend of Brooks, said that he had been using drugs. Officer Smith also testified that Brooks did not seem lucid during their five-to-seven-minute interaction and only “somewhat” seemed alert and aware of what was going on.

As Officer Smith and Brooks continue to talk, Officer Cathey says to Officer Smith, “tell him, we got to have Casey though.” Officer Cathey says to Brooks, “it would be easier for you if we had Casey.” Brooks reiterates that Schmuck hangs around the Z Market on Macon and Maria and that he has not seen Schmuck in a week and a half. Brooks also says that Schmuck was hanging out at an abandoned property on Pleasant Cove.

Officer Cathey then gets in the patrol car to transport Brooks to the station. As they begin to leave, Officer Cathey radios to cancel the transport and says to Brooks, “I want you to take me to Casey, you hear me? Alright, tell me where to go.” Brooks's response is inaudible, but Officer Cathey indicates he is going to a location on National. Officer Cathey testified that Brooks knew where Schmuck was but did not know the address, so Officer Cathey asked Brooks to show him the location. Officer Cathey tells Brooks that he can lay down in the patrol car if he wants to, and he testified that that offer was for Brooks to avoid being seen to protect his safety. Brooks gives Officer Cathey directions as he drives to Schmuck's suspected location. Brooks also reiterates that Schmuck has been staying at the house on Print. Officer Cathey arrives at a location, asks an individual if Schmuck is there, and leaves his contact information with the individual to call if Schmuck comes back.

After learning that Schmuck was not at the location, Officer Cathey suggests that Schmuck will be found at the Print house and says he will go to that house. As he drives, Brooks continues to give directions. Brooks asks if he is going to get charged, and Officer Cathey says both of them will get charged, but Schmuck was the one who did the act. Officer Cathey tells Brooks he does not want to get into the facts of the incident because he had not read him his rights. As Officer Cathey's patrol car approaches Print, Brooks points out Schmuck's grandmother's house. Leaving Brooks in the car, Officer Cathey and other officers approach the home, and Schmuck is taken into custody. Officer Cathey testified that they did not find the stolen shotgun when they arrested Schmuck; officers went back to recover it from the Print house after interviewing Schmuck based on information Schmuck provided. Officer Cathey gets back into the patrol car and tells Brooks, “good job, Rodney.”

Officer Cathey then transports Brooks to the station, to the violent crimes unit. Officer Cathey testified that, during the trip, Brooks asked him a couple of times about smoking a cigarette. They arrive at the station around 10:48 a.m.

Officer Cathey testified that Brooks was able to answer all of his questions and was very current and coherent. During the drive, Officer Cathey asked Brooks if he had information about other individuals he was looking for in unrelated investigations, and he testified that Brooks was able to talk to him about that as well.

At 11:36 a.m., at the violent crimes unit facility, Detective Williams and Sergeant Hilliard interviewed Brooks. Sergeant Hilliard testified that, prior to the interview, he received a telephone call saying that Brooks and Schmuck were in custody, but he did not discuss any details. Detective Williams testified that Brooks was brought directly to him after he was apprehended, which is when they began the interview.

Detective Williams has worked for the MPD since June 2009. He is currently assigned to the violent crimes unit, where he has worked since January 2019, investigating carjacking robberies and interstate shootings throughout the city of Memphis. Last year, his unit investigated over 400 carjackings. Sergeant Hilliard has worked for the MPD for fifteen years.

Detective Williams has interviewed numerous defendants, witnesses, and victims in his career. For suspects, he utilizes a standard procedure: two investigators sit down with the suspect in a private room with body worn cameras used to audio and video record the interaction. The investigators give the suspect an advice of rights form that lists the Miranda rights. The investigators allow the suspect to read over the rights and initial each one to show understanding, and they answer any questions the suspect has. If the suspect understands his or her rights and wants to speak with the investigators, the suspect prints and signs his or her name on the form, and the investigators sign as well. Once the waiver form is signed, the investigators begin questioning the suspect about the incident. Detective Williams testified that it is normal for suspects to contemplate whether to share their story.

Detective Williams testified that, during the interview, Brooks seemed calm, alert, and sober and that nothing gave him pause to interview Brooks. Exhibit 1 contains the recording of this interview. The video shows Brooks, Detective Williams, and Sergeant Hilliard sitting around a...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex