STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. CLYDE GAYLE (12-08-2273, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-0575-14T4
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Mar 17, 2017Background
- Defendant Clyde Gayle was convicted by a jury of unlawful possession of a .38 handgun, possession of hollow-point bullets, and being a certain person not to possess a weapon; court imposed an extended 14-year term with 7 years parole ineligibility on the certain-persons count.
- Police Real Time Tactical Operations officer Thornton observed activity on surveillance cameras near Louis and Sycamore Streets and testified ShotSpotter alerted to gunfire at ~4:30 a.m.; Thornton saw Gayle leave a house, place his hand at his right waistband, and behave as if holding/positioning a firearm.
- Thornton relayed a description to responding officers. Officer Welch located a black Saturn; Gayle was a rear passenger and was seen bending/"scurrying" behind the seat. Officers ordered occupants out; a handgun with hollow-point rounds was observed under the driver’s seat and seized.
- Gayle moved to suppress the gun and ammunition, arguing the stop and ShotSpotter evidence were improper; the trial court denied the motion, finding reasonable suspicion and a lawful plain-view seizure.
- On appeal Gayle contended (1) ShotSpotter testimony was inadmissible because Thornton was not qualified and reliability had not been established, (2) the investigatory stop lacked reasonable suspicion absent ShotSpotter, and (3) the extended-term sentence was unsupported. The Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Gayle) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of ShotSpotter testimony | Thornton's lay testimony about ShotSpotter was factual background and admissible to explain officers' response; no expert qualification needed | ShotSpotter evidence required expert foundation and a scientific-reliability hearing; Thornton was not qualified | Admissible as lay opinion/factual foundation under N.J.R.E. 701; even if error, admission harmless (no effect on guilt) |
| Validity of investigatory stop | Totality of circumstances (ShotSpotter alert + camera observations of Gayle's movements) gave reasonable, articulable suspicion for a Terry stop | Without ShotSpotter, officers lacked reasonable suspicion; suppression should have been granted | Stop upheld: sufficient credible evidence supports reasonable suspicion based on ShotSpotter plus observed conduct; defer to trial court credibility findings |
| Lawfulness of weapon seizure | Weapon was in plain view during the encounter and lawfully seized | Seizure unlawful if the stop was invalid or evidence improperly admitted | Seizure lawful under plain-view doctrine; independent basis because stop was proper |
| Extended-term sentence | Judge made required Dunbar findings, weighed aggravating factors (risk of reoffense, prior record, deterrence) and found no mitigators; defendant eligible as persistent offender | Judge failed to perform the Dunbar analysis and improperly imposed extended term | Sentence affirmed: judge applied correct legal framework, findings supported by credible evidence; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes standard for investigatory stops)
- State v. Stovall, 170 N.J. 346 (use totality of circumstances for reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Elders, 192 N.J. 224 (deferential review of factual findings on suppression)
- State v. Bruzzese, 94 N.J. 210 (plain-view seizure doctrine)
- State v. Dunbar, 108 N.J. 80 (procedure for extended-term sentencing analysis)
- State v. Macon, 57 N.J. 325 (harmless-error standard)
- State v. Doriguzzi, 334 N.J. Super. 530 (distinguishing reliability standards for admission vs. foundational use)
- Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (context for plain-view and seizure principles)
- State v. Bolvito, 217 N.J. 221 (standards for appellate review of sentencing)