State v. Hill
288 Neb. 767
| Neb. | 2014Background
- At ~10:41 p.m. on Feb. 18, 2012, two Omaha officers heard nearby gunshots, checked ShotSpotter, and drove to the address identified by the system.
- Officers encountered Thylun M. Hill as he walked toward them; they announced “Omaha police,” Hill fled, and during pursuit a revolver fell from his person; officers fired and then arrested him.
- The victim’s body was found in the backyard at/near the ShotSpotter location; ballistic testing tied the gun recovered in Hill’s flight path to the bullets in the victim.
- A warrant affidavit (prepared by Officer Queen) led to a search of Hill’s apartment the next day; officers found .38-caliber ammunition in a bag in Hill’s bedroom.
- The State relied on ShotSpotter forensic reports and testimony (SST engineer Paul Greene) to establish timing and location of four shots; Hill moved to suppress (person and home) and moved in limine under Daubert to exclude ShotSpotter evidence; he was convicted of first degree murder and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of evidence from search of Hill’s person | Hill: seizure occurred when officers announced themselves; no reasonable suspicion to detain; therefore search and items should be suppressed | State: Hill was not seized until physically subdued after flight; by then officers had probable cause (flight with gun near recent gunfire in high-crime area) | Court: Denied suppression — under Hodari D. no seizure before Hill yielded; by apprehension officers had probable cause; search incident to arrest valid |
| Suppression of evidence from apartment search warrant | Hill: affidavit lacked probable cause (omitted key facts, e.g., time of death, proximity, immediacy) so evidence should be suppressed | State: even if affidavit weak, officers reasonably relied on magistrate’s warrant — good-faith exception applies | Court: Affidavit not a ‘bare bones’ submission and officer reliance was objectively reasonable; applied Leon good-faith exception and denied suppression |
| Exclusion of ShotSpotter expert evidence (Daubert) | Hill: ShotSpotter unreliability — no blind testing, unknown system capacity at incident time, incident-reviewers use subjective judgments | State: underlying triangulation/math reliable; system testing/maintenance and Greene’s qualifications sufficed to establish reliability and fit | Court: Denied Daubert challenge — court did not abuse discretion; ShotSpotter methodology and Greene’s testimony admissible to assist jury |
| Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree murder | Hill: circumstantial gaps, no eyewitnesses, no DNA, possible alternative suspect, and facts consistent with lesser offense | State: ballistics, ShotSpotter timing, Hill’s proximity, flight with the weapon, ammunition at residence, and motive evidence supported premeditation | Court: Evidence sufficient when viewed in State’s favor; timing between shots and other facts support premeditated first-degree murder — conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (gatekeeping standard for expert testimony)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (no seizure without yielding to show of authority)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (unprovoked flight in high-crime area probative of suspicion)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (limits on exclusionary rule; deliberate/reckless police conduct required)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (stop-and-frisk / reasonable suspicion standard)
- Schafersman v. Agland Coop, 262 Neb. 215 (Nebraska Daubert/Schafersman jurisprudence on expert admissibility)