Opinion ID: 2972268
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: On February 10, 2002, at approximately 6:10 p.m., Faulkner was driving his car on a twolane road in a residential area of south Memphis. Faulkner was accompanied by one passenger, Roderick Robinson. Officers Schafer and O’Brien, of the Memphis Police Department, were No. 04-5589 United States v. Faulkner traveling in an unmarked police car directly behind Faulkner. Officer Schafer claims that, while traveling southbound on the residential street, Faulkner inexplicably stopped his car near the middle of the road. Officer Schafer testified that, in order to pass Faulkner’s car, Schafer would have had to drive in the opposing lane of traffic. Officer Schafer claims that Faulkner remained stopped for approximately 15-20 seconds, after which time the officers turned on their emergency lights and began to exit the car. Officer Schafer testified that, as the officers approached Faulkner, Faulkner quickly exited his car, appeared nervous and agitated, and began to walk away from the car and from the officers. Based on these observations, Officer Schafer feared that Faulkner was going to “flee or fight,” and he accordingly placed Faulkner in the backseat of his police car. The officers then approached Faulkner’s vehicle and began questioning Faulkner’s passenger, Roderick Robinson. In response to the questioning, Robinson stated that he had known Faulkner since childhood, but was unable to recall Faulkner’s last name. Robinson also told the officers that he and Faulkner had been returning from Blockbuster; however, the officers did not see tapes or store bags.1 Officer Schafer further testified that Robinson also appeared nervous and agitated and that he failed to answer questions about an open box of sandwich baggies that was located between his legs.2 Schafer testified that he was suspicious of the situation based on his interaction with Faulkner and Robinson, and based on the fact that the stop occurred in a high-crime 1 The lack of tapes or bags from Blockbuster is consistent with Faulkner’s claim that he and Robinson had been returning from dropping off a tape at the video store. 2 Officer Schafer testified that baggies are commonly used to package illegal narcotics. -2- No. 04-5589 United States v. Faulkner area known for drug trafficking. The officers then proceeded to place Robinson in the back seat of the police car with Faulkner. Officer Schafer subsequently activated a tape recorder housed in the trunk of the police car, which taped Robinson and Faulkner’s conversation in the back seat. Neither Faulkner nor Robinson knew they were being recorded. During this time, Officer O’Brien began the process of running a check on Faulkner’s license. While Officer O’Brien was running the records check, Officer Schafer asked Faulkner for consent to search the car. According to the audio tape, Faulkner responded “I mean you search it. I ain’t got nothing in the car.” Officer Schafer responded, “Okay. Thank you.” Schafer then asked Faulkner, “You own the car, right?” Faulkner confirmed that he was the owner. Officer Schafer then began searching the car. After a few minutes of searching the car, Officer Schafer returned to the police car to listen to the tape recording of Faulkner and Robinson’s conversation. On the audiotape, Robinson asked Faulkner if the pistol was in the car. Faulkner stated that the pistol was “in the console.” After listening to this conversation, Officer Schafer resumed his search of Faulkner’s car and located a bag with seven marijuana cigarettes and a Rossi .38-caliber revolver in the console. According to Officer Schafer, when he returned to the police car with the items, Faulkner stated “That’s my stuff.”3 Faulkner was then arrested for obstructing traffic, driving on a suspended license, and possessing marijuana with intent to sell. Faulkner’s car was subsequently towed from the scene. 3 This statement was not captured on audiotape. -3- No. 04-5589 United States v. Faulkner Faulkner disputes many of the facts related to the search. Faulkner claims that the officers followed his car for several blocks, and that he only stopped his car when the police officers turned on their emergency lights. Faulkner also claims that he did not stop his car in the middle of the road, but rather that he stopped the car directly beside the curb, as evidenced by Robinson’s testimony that he stepped directly from the car onto the curb. Faulkner and Robinson also claim that the search of Faulkner’s car began before Officer Schafer ever asked for consent. Finally, despite the existence of the audiotape, Faulkner claims that he did not consent to the search. In explaining his apparent consent on the tape, Faulkner claims that his statement, “I mean you search it. I ain’t got nothing in the car,” simply meant that, hypothetically, if the officers did search the car, they wouldn’t find anything. Faulkner moved to suppress, and the motion was referred to a magistrate judge. After an evidentiary hearing on the matter, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the motion to suppress be denied. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation was adopted by the district court and an order denying the motion to suppress was issued. On January 9, 2004, Faulkner entered a conditional plea of guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a weapon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The plea agreement allowed him to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. -4- No. 04-5589 United States v. Faulkner