Kelby R. Gordon v. United States
120 A.3d 73
| D.C. | 2015Background
- Four plainclothes MPD officers entered an apartment building foyer and encountered about four men; officers smelled burnt marijuana in the building but did not see anyone smoking.
- Officer Whisnant asked Kelby Gordon for identification; Gordon initially gave the name “Khalil Mikes,” DOB, and said he had been jailed before but had no ID.
- Officer Whisnant ran the provided name through a laptop WALES/NCIC check, got no hit, and persistently questioned Gordon about spelling, aliases, and prior incarceration for about ten minutes until Gordon finally gave his real name.
- After the officers located Gordon’s real identity in a database, a WALES/NCIC check revealed an outstanding probation-violation arrest warrant and Gordon was arrested; he then admitted to having marijuana and officers found eight small baggies.
- Gordon moved to suppress his statements and the marijuana as fruits of an unlawful seizure; the trial court denied suppression, he entered a conditional guilty plea, and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether repeated questioning about identity converted a consensual encounter into a seizure | Gordon: ten minutes of persistent questioning and database checks made a reasonable person feel not free to leave => seizure | Government: questioning was calm, no weapons drawn, public area, no coercive conduct => consensual encounter | Court: Repeated questioning plus database checks converted encounter into a seizure prior to discovery of warrant |
| If a seizure occurred, whether officers had reasonable suspicion to detain Gordon | Gordon: officers lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion before discovering the warrant | Government: presence in high-crime area, loitering, smell of marijuana, prior arrest, and a false name gave reasonable suspicion | Court: Facts (high-crime area, loitering, smell, prior incarceration) plus suspected false name did not amount to reasonable suspicion; seizure unlawful |
| Whether the discovery of the warrant attenuated the taint so statements and evidence need not be suppressed | Gordon: warrant was discovered contemporaneously and did not attenuate the illegality; suppression required | Government: discovery of outstanding arrest warrant is an intervening event that purges the taint | Court: No attenuation — temporal proximity, absence of intervening circumstances, and purpose of police conduct require suppression |
| Remedy following suppression ruling | Gordon: suppression requires vacatur of plea and remand | Government: urged affirmance | Court: Reversed denial of suppression, vacated guilty plea, remanded for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (establishes that investigative detentions require reasonable, articulable suspicion)
- Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (U.S. 1975) (attenuation factors for excluding derivative evidence from illegal seizure)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (U.S. 2000) (unprovoked flight in high-crime area can support reasonable suspicion when coupled with other facts)
- Guadalupe v. United States, 585 A.2d 1348 (D.C. 1991) (repeated or successive questioning can create an intimidating atmosphere amounting to a seizure)
- Jackson v. United States, 805 A.2d 979 (D.C. 2002) (continued questioning after a responsive answer can transform a consensual encounter into a seizure)
- Hawkins v. United States, 663 A.2d 1221 (D.C. 1995) (repeated questioning about weapons converted an encounter into a seizure)
- Anderson v. United States, 658 A.2d 1036 (D.C. 1995) (lie plus surrounding facts may be insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion)