State of Maine v. Roberts

STATE OF MAINE STATE OF MAINE UNIFIED CRIMINAL DOCKET CUMBERLAND, ss. Cumberland, SS. Clerk's Office POR1LAND Docket No. CR-16-5565 MAR 23 2017 STATE OF MAINE REC~IVED ) v. ) ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S SECOND ) MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS ) AND MOTION IN LIMINE FOLLOWING STEVEN ROBERTS ) EVIDENTIARY HEARJNG ) Defendant )

By Order dated March 2, 2017, the court granted Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration and agreed to set this matter for an evidentiary hearing on Defendant's pending suppression and in limi'ne motions. On March 16, 2017, the court heard oral argwnent from Assistant District Attorney Carlos Diaz, representing the State, and from Attorney Lawrence Winger, representing Defendant, and heard testimony from paramedic Christopher Desjardins, from Deputy Stephen Welsh, and from Defendant. Defendant filed a Post-Hearing Memorandum on March 17,2017. With respect to Defendant's Miranda-based challenge, the State must prove the admissibility of Defendant's statements by a preponderance of the evidence. State v. King, 2016 ME 54, 1 16. Asswning that the scope of the constitutional protections encompassed within the Miranda rule even apply to statements made to EMTs, Defendant concedes, as he must, that Miranda is not triggered unless Defendant was "in custody'' at the time. The well-established factors for determining whether a defendant was ''in custody" are set forth in State v. King: 1) the locale where the defendant made the statements; 2) the party who initiated the contact; 3) the existence or non-existence of probable cause to arrest (to the extent communicated to the defendant); 4) subjective views, beliefs, or intent that the police manifested to the defendant to the extent they would affect how a reasonable person in the defendant's position would perceive his or her freedom to leave; 5) subjective views or beliefs that the defendant manifested to the police, to the extent the officer's response would affect how a reasonable person in the defendant's position would perceive his or her freedom to leave;

6) the focus of the investigation (as a reasonable person in the defendant's position would perceive it); 7) whether the suspect was questioned in familiar surroundings; 8) the number of law enforcement officers present; 9) the degree of physical restraint placed upon the suspect; and l 0) the duration and character of the duration.

State v. King, 2016 ME 54, 117 (citing State v. Dion, 2007 ME 87,123).

Application of these factors to the testimony adduced at hearing yields the following: Defendant spoke to the EMTs while in the driveway of his home. Although the contact was not initiated by Defendant, he was not told that he was under arrest, nor was there any discussion about probable cause or any other law enforcement-related issues. The deputy present at the scene was assisting the paramedic. Defendant testified that both the deputy and the paramedic told him he should go to the hospital, he "felt like he had a choice, but the officer was right, he needed to go." Only Deputy Welsh and paramedic Desjardins were on the scene until Defendant was brought to the ambulance, which is approximately when Sargeant David Hall arrived. Although Attorney Winger argued that the facial pressure used by paramedic Desjardins to stanch Defendant's facial bleeding amounted to "physical restraint", the court finds that Defendant was not in fact physically restrained. The entire encounter lasted 25-30 minutes. Asswning that "in custody" analysis even applies to statements made to an EMT, the court finds that the evidence adduced at hearing shows that Defendant was not "in custody" at the time he made the statements Defendant seeks to suppress. Because Defendant was not "in custody", Miranda warnings were not required. The fact that at the hearing on Defendant's motions the State did not call paramedic Holmquist does not entitle Defendant, as he argues, to suppression of statements made to paramedic Holmquist because the court's finding that Defendant was not "in custody>' encompasses the statements made to both paramedics. With respect to Defendant's "lack of voluntariness" argwnent, the State bears the burden of proving voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt, and ''[i]n order to find a statement voluntary, it must first be established that it is the result of defendant's exercise of his own free will and rational intellect." State v. Dion, 2007 ME 87, 1 33. Attorney Winger argues that Defendant's physical state ("he was in shock, he was concussed, he had a broken nose and facial lacerations") rendered his statements involuntary as a matter of law. The court finds, first, that whether Defendant "was in shock" and/or "concussed" was not established by the evidence

adduced at trial. Moreover. whether or not Defendant was "in shock'' and "concussed". the undisputed evidence establishes that at the time he made the statements he was conscious, oriented, and alert. Based on the evidence, the court finds that the State has proven the voluntariness of Defendant's statements beyond a reasonable doubt. With respect to Defendant's motion in limine, Defendant argues that paramedics should be encompassed within the privilege set forth in Rule 503 of the Maine Rules of Evidence even though the Rule. by its express terms, is limited to communications with "health care professionals" (defined as licensed physicians, licensed physician's assistants, and licensed nurse practitioners), mental health professionals, and licensed counseling professionals. See M.R. Evid. 503(a) & (b). Finding that due process does not entitle Defendant to an extension of the privilege set forth in Rule 503, the court declines to extend the privilege to include communications made to paramedics. Having considered counsel's oral and written argument and the evidence adduced at hearing, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Second Motion to Suppress Statements and Motion in Limine is DENIED in its entirety.

DATED: Jed French Jud 1 e, Unified Criminal Docket

STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET VS CllMBERI ,AND, ss. STEVEN E ROBERTS Docket No CUMCD-CR-2016-05565 35 JOHNSON RD GRAY ME 04039 DOCKET RECORD

DOB: 05/05/1964 Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER State's Attorney: STEPHANIE ANDERSON LAW OFFICE OF I ,A WRENCE C WINGER 75 PEARL STREET, SUITE 460 PORTLAND ME 04101 PARTIALLY INDIGENT 09/14/2016 Filing Document: CRIMINAi, COMPLAINT Major Case Type: MISDEMEANOR (CLASS D,E) Filing Date: 09/12/2016 Charge(s) I DRIVIN<1 TO ENDANGER 07/27/2016 GRAY Seq 1232 29-A 2413(1) Class E WE~H I CUM Docket Event~: 09/12/2016 HLING DOCUMENT - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 09/12/2016

09/12/2016 Charge(s): I HEARING . ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULE OTHER COURT ON 09/14/2016 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No.

PORSC 09/14/2016 Chargc(s): 1 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT HELD ON 09/14/2016 MARY KELLY , JUDGE DA: ANGELA CANNON Defendant Present in Court DEI--ENDANT INfORMED OF CHARGES. FfRJ 09/ 14/20 16 Charge(s): I PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED RY DEFENDANT ON 09/14/2016

09/14/2016 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 09/14/2016

09/14/2016 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL GRANTED ON 09/14/2016 MARY KELLY ,JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 09/14/2016 P'arty(s): STEVEN E ROBERTS ATTORNEY - PARTIALLY INDIGENT ORDERED ON 09/14/2016

Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER 09/14/2016 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCt-: SCHEDULED rOR 11/29/2016 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 7

09/14/2016 Charge(s): 1 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 01/23/2017 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 11

NO'ffCE TO PARTll:::.S/COUNSEL J 1/29/2016 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE HELD ON 11/29/2016 ANDREW HORTON , .llJSTICE Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER DA: ANGELA CANNON CONF HELD, OFFER MADE. CASE UNRESOLVED. MOTIONS MAY BE FILED. HEARING TO RE SET rOR 12-22 MOTION - OTHER MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/29/2016 CR-200 Page 1 of 5 Printed on: 03/24/2017

STEVEN E ROBERTS ClJMCD-CR-2016-05565 DOCKET RECORD 11/30/2016 Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER MOTION TO CORRECT DEFENDANT'S DRIVER HISTORY CONVICTION l 1/30/2016 MOTION - MOTION FOR FURTHER DISCOVERY FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/29/2016

Attorney: LA WREN CE WINGER I 1/30/2016 MOTION· MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT FILED 13Y DEFENDANT ON 11/29/2016

Attorney: LA WREN CE WINGER 11/30/2016 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 12/22/2016 al 01 :00 p.m. in Room No.

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 11/30/2016 LETTER - REQUEST FOR PROTECrION FILED ON 11/30/2016

Allorney: LA WREN CE WINGER JANUARY 24, 2017 PRIOR TO I :00 PM 12/02/2016 LETTER - rROM PARTY FILED ON 12/02/2016

Allorney: LA WREN CE WINGER COIJNSEL WITHDRAWING REQUEST IN PARAGRAPH 5 OF MOTJON FOR FURTHER OISCOVERY 12/15/2016 MOTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE FILED HY STATE ON 12/1.5/2016

STATES UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONTINUE MOTION TO SUPPRESS ANO MOTION FOR DISCOVERY. 12/16/2016 MOTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE GRANTED ON 12/16/2016 PA UL A FRITZSCHE, JUSTICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/16/2016 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT CONTINUED ON 12/16/2016 PAIJL A FRJTZSCHE ,.llJSTICE 12/16/2016 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE SCHEDlJLEO FOR 01/12/2017 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No.

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/16/2016 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE NOTICE SENT ON 12/16/2016

12/28/2016 LETTER - I-ROM PARTY FILED ON 12/28/2016

Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER CHANGE OF ADDRESS fROM ATTORNEY. NEW ADDRESS 75 PEARL STREET SUITE 4o0 PORTLAND ME. 01/09/2017 Charge(s): I MOTION - MCTl'ION TO CONTINUE FlLl·.J) BY DEFENDANT ON 01/09/2017

NO OBJ BY STATE 01/09/2017 Charge(s): l MOTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE GRANTED ON 01/09/2017 PAUL A FRJTZSCHE, JUSTICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/09/2017 HEARIN(i - MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE CONTINUED ON 01/09/2017 PAULA FRITZSCHP. ,.JUSTICE 0I/09/2017 Charge(s): I HEARING. MOTION TO SUPPRESS SCHEDULED fOR 01/19/2017 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No.

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEi, 01/09/2017 Charge(s): I

CR-200 Page 2 of 5 Printed on: 03/24/2017

STEVEN E ROBERTS Cl!MCD-CR-2016-05565 DOCKET RECORD HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS NOTICE SENT ON 01/09/2017

01/17/2017 Charge(s): I MOTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 01/17/2017

Attorney: LAWRENCE WlNGl-:.R MOTION TO CONTINUE HEARING ON 1-19. 01/18/2017 Charge(s): 1 MOTION - MOTION TO CONTINUE GRANTED ON 01/18/2017 ROLAND A COLE , .fl/STICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/18/2017 Charge(s): I HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS CONTINUED ON 01/18/2017 ROLAND A COLE, JUSTICE 01/18/2017 Charge(s): I TRIAL- JURY TRIAL CONTINUED ON 01/18/2017

OI/IR/2017 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS SCHEDULED FOR 02/02/2017 al OJ :00 p.m. in Room No.

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSt-:L 01/18/2017 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS NOTICE SENT ON 01/18/2017

02/06/2017 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS HELD ON 02/02/2017 JED FRENCH , JUDGE Allorney: I .A WRENCE WINGER DA: ANGELA CANNON Defendant Present in Court HEARING HELD. ARGUMENTS MADE ON THE RECORD. MOTION FOR DISCOVERY GRANTED IN PART. MOTION TO SUPPRESS UNDER ADVISEMENT. HRfEFSTO BE SUBMITl'ED BY FRIDAY 2-10-17. 02/06/2017 TRIAi. - .JlJRY TRIAL SCHEDULl:m FOR 03/13/2017 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 11

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 02/06/2017 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL NOTICE SENT ON 02/06/2017

02/06/2017 MOTION - OTHER MOTION FILED BY DEt-+:NDANT ON 02/06/2017

MOTION FOR STATE PROVIDED TRANSPORTATION OR STAY 01-' PROSECUTION. STATE OBJECTS. 02/14/2017 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRF.SS STATEMENT FILl-:.D HY DEFENDANT ON 02/06/2017

AND LIMINE. 02/14/2017 OTHER FILING - MEMORANDUM OF LAW FILED ON 02/10/2017

DErENDANT'S MEMORANDUM RE: SUPPRESSION OF STATEMENTS EMTS. 02/15/2017 OTHER HUNG - OTHER DOCUMENT HLED ON 02/10/2017

DA: MATTHEW TICE STATE'S RESPONSE TO ARGUMENT DEFENDANT IS AFFORDED CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION FROM EMfS 02/21/2017 CASE STATUS - CASE FILE LOCATJON ON 02/10/2017 JIM PAUL TURCOTTE, ASSISTANT CLERK CASE WITH JUDGE FRENCH RE: MOTION TO SUPPRESS 02/22/2017 MOTION - OTHER MOTION WITHDRAWN ON 02/21/2017

CR-200 Page 3 of 5 Printed on: 03/24/2017

STEVEN E ROl::H:RTS ClJMCD-CR-2016-05565 DOCKET RECORD Attorney: I .A WRENCE WINGER MOTION rOR STATE PROVIDED TRANSPORTATION OR STAY Or PROSECUTION. STATE OBJECTS. 02/22/2017 CASE STATUS - CASE FILE IU-TIJRNED ON 02/21/2017

02/22/2017 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMtNT DENIED ON 02/21/2017 JED FRENCH ,JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 02/22/2017 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT DENIED ON 02/21/2017 JED FRENCH . JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEi, 02/22/2017 ORDER - COURT ORDER FILED ON 02/22/2017 JED FRENCH , .JUDGE ORDER ON DErtNDANT'S SECOND MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS AND MOTION IN LIMlNE. MOTION HEREBY DENIED. 02;2g;2017 Charge(s): I MOTION - MOTION TO RECONSIDER HNDING HLED BY DEFENDANT ON 02/27/2017

03/03/2017 Chargc(s): l MOTION - MOTION TO RECONSIDER FINDING GRANTED ON 03/02/2017 JED FRENCH , JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 03/03/2017 ORDER - COURT ORDER FILED ON 03/03/2017

DEFENDANT'S MOTION fOI{ RECONSIDERATION IS GRANTED AND THIS MATTER SHALL BE SEI' rOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO DEVELOP THE FACTUAL RECORD WITH RESPECf TO BOTH DEFENDANT'S SUPPRESSION MOTION AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE. 03/06/2017 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL CONTINUED ON 03/06/2017 PAUL A FRITZSCHE, JUSTICE 03/06/2017 HEARING - EVIDENTlARY HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 03/16/2017 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. I

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 03/06/2017 HEARING - EVIDENTIARY HEARING NOTICE SENT ON 03/06/2017

03/06/2017 TRIAL - JURY TRIAi, SCHEDULED FOR 04/24/2017 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 11

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 03/06/2017 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL NOTICE SENT ON 03/06/2017

03/17/2017 HEARING - EVIDENTIARY HEARING HELD ON 03/16/2017 JED FRENCH ,.IUDGE Attorney: LAWRENCE WINGER DA: CARLOS DIAZ STATE CALLS CHRISTOPHER DEJARDINS, CROSS EXAMINATION. STATE CALLS DEPUTY WELSH, CROSS EXAMINATION, STATE'S EXHIHITS 1&2 OFFERED AND ADMIITED WITHOUT OBJECTION. DEFENSE CALLS STEVEN ROIJERTS, CROSS EXAMINATION. CLOSING ARGUMENTS. ATrORNEY WINGER TO rOLLOW UP WITH ANY WRITTEN RESPONSE BY END Of DAY ON 3-17-17. FJ'R I 03/17/2017 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT UNDER ADVlSHMENT ON 03/16/2017 JED FRENCH , JUDGE 03/17/2017 CASE STATUS - CASE Fii .EI .OCATION ON 03116/2017

JUOGE FRENCH'S CHAMBERS 03/17/2017 OTHER HUNG - MEMORANOUM Or LAW FILED ON 03/17/2017

Cl{-200 Page 4of 5 Printed on: 03/24/2017

STEVEN E ROBERTS CUMCD-CR-2016-05565 DOCKET RECORD Attorney: l.A WRENCE WINGER 03/24/2017 ORDER ­ COURT ORDER FILED ON 03/23/2017 JED FRENCH , JUDGE e~1i~~~p1 SECOND MOTlON TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS AND MOTION IN LIMINE IS DENIED IN ITS

A TRUE COPAtte Y ~ \ !~ ATTEST: ter k of Courts Clerk

CR-ZOO Page 5 of 5 Printed on: 03/24/2017