Daniel C. Stovall v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED "NOT TO BE PUBLISHED." PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT, CR 76.28(4)(C), THIS OPINION IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED AND SHALL NOT BE CITED OR USED AS BINDING PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER CASE IN ANY COURT OF THIS STATE; HOWEVER, UNPUBLISHED KENTUCKY APPELLATE DECISIONS, RENDERED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2003, MAY BE CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT IF THERE IS NO PUBLISHED OPINION THAT WOULD ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT. OPINIONS CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT SHALL BE SET OUT AS AN UNPUBLISHED DECISION IN THE FILED DOCUMENT AND A COPY OF THE ENTIRE DECISION SHALL BE TENDERED ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENT TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES TO THE ACTION. VEA-r,iviior,rs. 10, zl../19 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED (E-ourf of l',Rrtiftithg 2013-SC-000788-MR DANIEL C. STOVALL APPELLANT ON APPEAL FROM BOYLE CIRCUIT COURT V. HONORABLE DARREN PECKLER, JUDGE NO. 13-CR-00071 COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT AFFIRMING A Boyle Circuit Court jury found Appellant, Daniel C. Stovall, guilty of four counts of first-degree criminal mischief, three counts of third-degree burglary, and two counts of theft by unlawful taking. As a result, he was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. He now appeals as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b), asserting that the trial court erred by (1) denying his pre-trial motion to suppress evidence seized from his unlawful arrest, (2) permitting Sheriff Curt Folger to testify as to hearsay statements made by another law enforcement officer during the investigation, and (3) permitting Officer Chris Stratton to testify about the contents of a surveillance video that was not produced in discovery and was unavailable by the time of trial. For the following reasons, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND Parksville Country Store, Hardee's BP, and Old Bridge Golf Club in Boyle County were burglarized all on the same night. Burglaries also continued into neighboring Lincoln County that night. Based on the surveillance video footage obtained from Parksville Country Store, police suspected that one black male and two white males were responsible for the burglaries. It also led police to believe that the men were driving a dark colored sport utility vehicle ("SUV"). As a result, Sergeant Sim Thacker of the Lincoln County Sheriff's Department attempted to pull over a black SUV, but the driver sped up and evaded Sergeant Thacker. Subsequently, police found the SUV abandoned, containing various stolen items from the burglarized stores. Police also found a wallet in the SUV, which contained a photograph of a young boy. Approximately twelve hours later and one and one half miles from the abandoned SUV, Appellant, a black male, was going from business to business attempting to obtain a ride from someone. Appellant eventually entered a green taxi, which drove approximately one mile before stopping to pick up a white male passenger, Joshua Johnson. Believing that these men matched the description of the burglars, Lincoln County Sheriff Curt Folger and Lancaster Police pulled the taxi over and arrested both passengers. During the stop, Sheriff Folger noticed that the passengers were dressed the same as the burglars on the surveillance video. Sheriff Folger also discovered a photograph in Johnson's wallet which was identical to that found in the abandoned SUV. After taking Appellant and Johnson to the police 2 station, law enforcement officers learned that the SUV, Johnson, and Appellant were all from Indiana. Police fingerprinted both suspects and, pursuant to a warrant, obtained DNA samples from Appellant and Johnson. Appellant's fingerprints and DNA matched those on a black plastic bag and gloves found in the SUV. Appellant filed a motion to suppress evidence discovered by police after his arrest on the grounds that the police illegally stopped the green taxi and arrested Appellant. The trial court denied his motion, and the case proceeded to jury trial. At trial and over Appellant's objection, Sheriff Folger testified that Special Deputy Hal Akers told him about Appellant going from business to business and entering the green taxi. Folger further testified the information provided by Akers led him to stop the taxi. Appellant also objected when Officer Chris Stratton testified about what he had seen on the Parksville Country Store's surveillance video because the video was not produced in discovery or played for the jury at trial. This objection was also overruled, and Appellant was convicted by a jury of the aforementioned charges and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. This appeal followed. II. ANALYSIS A. The Trial Court Did Not Err by Denying Appellant's Suppression Motion Appellant asserts that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence seized after his arrest. He contends that police lacked the requisite probable cause to arrest him, and therefore, evidence seized following the arrest was the inadmissible fruit of an unlawful arrest. An appellate 3 court's standard of review when addressing a suppression motion regarding an alleged illegal search or seizure is two-fold: First, historical facts should be reviewed for clear error, and the facts are deemed to be conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. Second, determinations of rea.sonable suspicion a.nd. probable cause are mixed questions of law and fact and. are, therefore, subject to de novo revie:w. in addition, we are bound to give "clue weight to i.n.ferences drawn from th.ose facts by :resident judges and local law enforcement officers." Bander v. Colionoinvea