People v. Grant

People v Grant 2023 NY Slip Op 34717(U) December 21, 2023 Supreme Court, Westchester County Docket Number: Ind. No. 23-71202-001 Judge: Robert A. Neary Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

FILED AND ENTERED ON /o:'/ -o2 / - 20-U DEC 2 1 2023 WESTCHESTER \ . .. ; .-·. , ,;. •'·· ~ . .I [))~.~~-.i·Ty .~-.1 I'":,~·:{ COUNTY CLERK COUN.i"Y Qr o.;;;.;1iCHESTER

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ------------------------------------------------------------------X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

- against - DECISION AND ORDER

AKEEM GRANT, Ind. No. 23-71202-001

Defendant. ------------------------------------------------------------------X NEARY, J.

The following constitutes the opinion, decision and order of the Court:

The defendant has been indicted for the crimes of Murder in the Second Degree,

Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, Arson in the Third Degree and

Tampering with Physical Evidence.. It is alleged that on or about April 6, 2023 the defendant

did fatally shoot Tamani Turner in the City of Mount Vernon, New York. [* 1]

People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

The defendant seeks to exclude certain identification testimony from several

civilian witnesses on the ground that the two (2) video and three (3) single photograph

identifications were improper and unduly suggestive.

The defendant further seeks suppression of certain items of physical evidence

contending they were seized pursuant to an unlawful arrest that lacked probable cause.

The People have the burden of going forward to show the pre-trial identification

pro~edure was not constitutionally impermissible. The defendant, however, bears the burden of

establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the procedure was impermissible.

If the procedure is shown to be impermissible, the People have the burden of

showing by clear and convincing evidence that the prospective in-court identification testimony,

rather than stemming from the unfair pre-trial procedure or confrontation, has an independent

source.

Before any physical evidence seized incident to arrest may be suppressed, the

defendant must establish that the illegality of his arrest by a preponderance of the evidence. The

People must preliminarily demonstrate that the arrest of the defendant was based upon

reasonable and probable cause.

By decision of the Hon. Anne E. Minihan dated August 18, 2023, pre-trial

Dunaway, Wade, Mapp and Sandoval/Ventimiglia hearings were ordered. On December 19,

2023, a combined hearing was held to address the Wade, Dunaway and Mapp issues. The

Sandoval/Ventimiglia hearing was adjourned until immediately prior to trial.

Page 2 [* 2]

People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

At the hearing, the People called as a witness Detective Joseph Valente of the

Mount Vernon Police Department. The Court finds the testimony of the People's witness to be

candid, plausible and fully credible. The defense presented no witnesses and offered a three (3) -

page written statement of Dwayne Douglas into evidence. The People's exhibits included three

(3) photos of the defendant.

This Court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:

FINDINGS OF FACTS

On April 6, 2023 at about 12:39 P.M., Mount Vernon police responded to a report

of "shots fired" on Garden Avenue between Fourth and Fifth Streets. Upon arrival, officers were

advised that an individual suffering gunshot wounds had been taken to the hospital by a family

member. Later that evening when it was learned the shooting victim, Tamini Turner, had

expired, the investigation was assigned to Detective Joseph Valente of the Major Case Unit.

Upon review of several surveillance videos and License Plate Readers (LPRs), detectives

focused on a certain Honda Accord registered to the defendant. One particular video from the

crime scene showed a distincti:vely dressed male matching the defendant's physical

characteristics exit the Honda, open the hood, retrieve a small object and place it in his waist

band. Moments later, Tamani Turner enters the video, leans into the passenger side of the Honda \

"' and appears to briefly converse with the above-mentioned operator before being shot.

Additional surveillance footage from 124 Mount Vernon Avenue showed the

driver of the Honda enter and exit the address approximately ten (10 minutes before the shooting.

Page 3 [* 3]

People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

Police learned that a woman at that residence, Ms. Sewell, is the mother of two (2) of the

defendant's children. She later identified the defendant from a single photograph as did the

defendant's stepfather, Dwayne Douglas who also identified him in surveillance video.

Detectives interviewed a friend of the defendant, O'Brien Perrier, who told them

he had been visited by the defendant on the afternoon of April 6, 2023. In addition to leaving

some personal items with Mr. Perrier, the defendant told him he may not be seeing him for a

while implying he was leaving the area. On Bay chester Avenue in nearby Bronx County, the

police eventually recovered the burned out remains of the Honda Accord registered to the

defendant.

Unable to locate the defendant locally, the detectives requested the FBI Safe

Streets Task Force place the defendant's name on a No Fly List. That listing resulted in the

federal authorities locating the defendant on April 7, 2023 at Philadelphia International Airport

after he purchased a one way ticket to Jamaica. Based on an arrest warrant obtained by Mount

Vernon detectives, the defendant was taken into custody and two (2) cell phones and a bag of

clothing were recovered from his person.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Wade/Dunaway Issuep

When the People assert that a pretrial identification was merely confirmatory,

they must bear the burden of proving that the identifying witness has sufficient familiarity with ·

Page 4 [* 4]

People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

the defendant to render the identification impervious to police suggestiveness. To do so, they

must come forward with details concerning the extent and degree of the witness' prior

relationship with the defendant. [See People v. Rodriguez, 79 NY2d at 452; People v. Collins,

60 NY2d 214].

The record is clear that each of the identifying witnesses had a prior familiarity,

and indeed long standing relationship, with the defendant ·the basis for which would render these

witnesses impervious to suggestiveness in any identification procedure. One is the defendant's

stepfather, another, the mother of his children and the third a longtime friend.

The probable cause standard is a non-mechanical concept that deals with the

factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men and

women, not legal technicians act.. [See Maryland v. Pringle, 54 US 366, 370]. What is required

is simply a reasonable ground for belief of guilt. It is a probability, not a certainty, or even a

primafacie case. [See Illinois v. Gates, 462 US 213, 235].

New York Courts have recognized that an arrest need not be supported by , information and knowledge that at the time points directly to a defendant's guilt beyond a

reasonable doubt and excludes all possibility of innocence. Rather, probable cause rests on

probabilities not certainty. [See People v. Bigelow, 66 NY2d 417]. For probable cause to exist,

the conclusion must be one that a reasonable· person, possessing the same expertise, training and

experience as the arresting officer, would reach. [See People v. Silas, 220 AD2d 467]. It is the

synthesis of all .the information gleaned by the investigator from any number of sources that links

Page 5 [* 5]

People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

the defendant to the alleged crime. A police officer may draw inferences based upon his or her

own experience and training to determine if probable cause ·exists.

Applying these standards, it is clear that the police had abundant probable cause

to detain and arrest the defendant. Among other considerations, he physically matched the man

removing a small object from under the hood of a car registered to him and placing it in his waist

band moments before the shooting. He was identified from video at or near the crime scene by

persons intimately familiar with him. The defendant's phone was detected near the crime scene

at the time of its occurrence. There is also strong evidence of flight and destruction of evidence.

Mapp Issue

The seizure of two (2) cell phones from the defendant's person and a bag of

clothes in his possession when arrested are determined by the Court to be appropriately

admissible as incident to a lawful arrest.

The Mapp and Wade/Dunaway motions are denied in their entirely.

This constitutes the opinion, decision and order of this Court.

The parties are direct to appear in T.A.P. on February 8, 2024 in Courtroom

303 before the Hon. James McCarty.

Dated: White Plains, New York December 21, 2023

ROBERT A. NEARY SUPREME COURT JUSTI

Page 6 [* 6]

.' · People v. Akeem Grant Indictment No. 23-71202-001

Nadine Nagler Timothy O'Hara Assistants District Attorney Westchester County Office of the District Attorney Richard J. Daronco Courthouse 111 Martin Luther King Blvd. White Plains, New York 10601 nnagler@westchesterda.net TOhara@westchesterda.net

Christina Hall, Esq. Attorney for Defendant 600 Mamaroneck A venu~, Suite 400 Harrison, New York 10528 CTHalljustice@gmail.com

Page 7 [* 7]