State of Maryland v. Lando Neshitt Alston

Annapolis, Maryland criminal defense attorney represented the Defendant charged with illegal possession of a regulated firearm after being convicted of a disqualifying crime.



On January 22, 2022, police officers were called to investigate a shooting outside of 450 Fontana Court, Glen Burnie, Maryland, 21061 ("residence"). After police arrived at the residence, an officer noticed the Appellant, Lando Nesbitt Alston ("Alston") in a black Jeep ("vehicle") parked directly in front of the residence. Alston tried to back his car out of the driveway and was prohibited to leave the active crime scene while police investigated the shooting. Others within the residence tried to leave the active crime scene multiple times and were told they were not allowed to leave while police investigated the shooting.



While marking evidence for the police's evidence collection team, a few police officers noticed evidence of a handgun and marijuana through the windshield of Alston's vehicle. Alston was charged with: (1) Controlled Dangerous Substance ("CDS") possession of marijuana with intent to distribute (Count One); (2) CDS possession of more than 10 grams of marijuana (Count Two); (3) firearm possession with felony conviction (Count Three); (4) illegal possession of a regulated firearm after being convicted of a disqualifying crime (Count Four); (5) loaded handgun in vehicle (Count Five); (6) handgun in vehicle (Count Six); and (7) illegal possession of ammunition (Count Seven). The State nol prossed Counts One through Three and Five through Seven.



* * *



Legal issue Did the motions court err in denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained from a warrantless and suspicionless seizure?

Headnote



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. WARRANTLESS SEIZURES. The case examines whether a warrantless and suspicionless seizure of a defendant at a crime scene violated Fourth Amendment rights, focusing on the applicability of exigent circumstances and special needs exceptions.



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. MOTION TO SUPPRESS. The judgment reviews the denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless seizure and evaluates the reasonableness of this action under the Fourth Amendment.



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. EXCLUSIONARY RULE. The court considers the applicability of the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained without a warrant and the exceptions that might justify circumventing this rule.



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. VEHICLE SEIZURE. The judgment addresses whether the seizure of a defendant's vehicle at a crime scene was reasonable and supported by probable cause, in light of Fourth Amendment protections.



Key Phrases Illegal possession of a regulated firearm. Active crime scene investigation. Warrantless and suspicionless seizure. Exigent circumstances exception. Special needs doctrine.

Reversed