207 A.3d 675
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2019Background
- In February 2015 Earl and Mary Ann Loomis were found murdered in their Elkton, Maryland home during a robbery; evidence suggested the house was ransacked and the Loomises restrained with duct tape.
- Police developed Derrick L. Carroll as a suspect; he left Maryland and was located in Trenton, New Jersey, where U.S. Marshals observed him carrying a white trash bag and later found three black garbage bags nearby.
- Mercer County (NJ) officers prepared affidavits relying on information from the joint Maryland–New Jersey investigation; two New Jersey search warrants issued for 27 Bryn Mawr Avenue and the garbage bag.
- Searches yielded items (cell phone, sweatshirt, ammunition, ski masks, keys, handbag) that tied occupants of the Trenton residence to the Loomises and were admitted at Carroll’s trial; Carroll was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and related conspiracies.
- Carroll moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the warrants lacked probable cause and nexus, and that New Jersey law (which rejects Leon’s good-faith exception) should govern; he also raised a plain-error claim about prosecutorial closing argument and asserted ineffective assistance as to waiver of some suppression arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Carroll's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause / nexus for warrants | Affidavit was conclusory; no facts explained why Carroll was a suspect or why evidence would be at the Trenton residence/garbage bag | Warrant recited corpus delicti, Carroll identified as suspect, Marshals observed him leaving the residence and discarding bag — corroboration supplies nexus | Issuing judge lacked substantial basis for probable cause because affidavit merely stated Carroll was “also a suspect”; warrants deficient on four-corners review |
| Good-faith exception / choice of law (Maryland v. New Jersey law) | New Jersey rejects Leon; because search occurred in NJ, NJ law should apply to bar Leon exception | Admission of evidence is a forum-procedural issue; Maryland law applies; also investigation was a cooperative multistate effort and Maryland has greater interest | Maryland’s Leon-based good-faith exception applies; warrants not so deficient that officers couldn’t reasonably rely on them; evidence admissible |
| Closing argument — racial-motive comments (plain error) | Prosecutor argued race-based motive before an all-white jury; counsel failed to object; plain error review warranted | Argument was fair comment on evidence (Carroll’s testimony and other trial evidence); not clearly improper | No plain error: comments were at least arguable fair comment on evidence and not clearly erroneous |
| Ineffective assistance (failure to preserve NJ-law suppression argument) | Counsel’s waiver of NJ-law argument was deficient and prejudicial | Record inadequate to evaluate strategic reasons; evidence would be admissible anyway (abandonment/other proof) | Court declined to reach claim because good-faith ruling made it unnecessary; noted post-conviction relief is usual vehicle when record is undeveloped |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-circumstances test for probable cause)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- State v. Novembrino, 519 A.2d 820 (N.J. 1987) (New Jersey declines adoption of Leon on state-constitutional grounds)
- McDonald v. State, 347 Md. 452 (Maryland adoption of Leon good-faith exception)
- Greenstreet v. State, 392 Md. 652 (standard of appellate review: substantial basis / four-corners review of warrant affidavits)