State v. Cox, 985 N.W.2d 395

March 6, 2017: Laron Rogers was shot in a convenience-store parking lot and later died; eyewitnesses identified a white Chevy Impala as the suspect vehicle.
Store surveillance and employees identified Forrest R. Cox III (nickname “Bubba”) and provided a paper with a phone number ending in 6473; Cox and Rogers exchanged calls/texts the hour before the shooting.
Law enforcement obtained cell-site location information (CSLI) and other cell records pursuant to a court order/warrant obtained under the Stored Communications Act (first warrant issued pre-Carpenter); CSLI placed Cox’s phone near the scene.
The district court initially granted Cox’s motion to suppress the records (State conceded pre-Carpenter defect), but the State obtained a second affidavit and warrant; the second suppression motion was denied and the records were admitted at trial.
Cox was interviewed Feb. 26, 2018; he denied shooting Rogers but admitted knowing Rogers and giving an alibi. Cox moved to suppress those statements as violative of Miranda; at trial he objected to the interview video but did not specifically object to detective testimony about the statements on Miranda grounds.
Jury convicted Cox of felony murder, use of a deadly weapon, and possession by a prohibited person; sentences imposed. Court of Appeals: appeal to Nebraska Supreme Court.

Issue	State's Argument	Cox's Argument	Held
Admissibility of cell phone records/CSLI (Fourth Amendment; Carpenter)	Officers relied reasonably on a court order under the Stored Communications Act; second warrant cured any defect; good-faith exception applies	First warrant was insufficient under Carpenter; CSLI obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment should be excluded	Records admissible: officers’ reliance on statutory procedure was objectively reasonable; good-faith/curative warrant justified admission
Admissibility of statements after alleged invocation of right to remain silent (Miranda/Fifth Amendment)	Cox failed to preserve Miranda objection at trial; video and testimony were cumulative; any error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt	Cox invoked right to remain silent and questioning continued, so statements should be suppressed	Waived for failure to object at trial; alternatively any error was harmless given independent evidence (CSLI, witness IDs, vehicle ties)

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (Miranda safeguards against compelled self-incrimination)
Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) (CSLI implicates Fourth Amendment; warrants generally required)
State v. Brown, 302 Neb. 53 (2019) (declined to suppress CSLI obtained under then-applicable statute based on officers’ reasonable reliance)
State v. Jennings, 305 Neb. 809 (2020) (same; explained exceptions to exclusionary rule for statutory reliance)
State v. Jenkins, 294 Neb. 684 (2016) (pre-Carpenter holding that CSLI did not implicate Fourth Amendment)
State v. Schriner, 303 Neb. 476 (2019) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
State v. Tompkins, 272 Neb. 547 (2006) (preservation rule: specific trial objection required to preserve suppression issues)