PA Chiefs_Bulletin Winter_2016

24 / 32

24 | PA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION | BULLETIN | WINTER 2016
LEGAL UPDATES FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
STUMP THE CHUMP
Chris-
Settle an argument for my Sergeant and
me. The example is a police shooting.
I say that until the District Attorney
clears the officer, he can't be forced to
make any statement. He says that Gar-
rity warnings means the officer has to
answer, even if he incriminates himself.
That could never be under the Miranda
case, right?
Lumpy Potatoes
Lumpy:
Pay the good Sergeant. Under Garrity,
an officer can be compelled to make a
statement, even though it might incrimi-
nate him, and refusal to make the state-
ment, can result in their termination.
The reason is this- A Garrity statement
can't be used against the officer in the
criminal investigation. The two in-
vestigations, criminal (Miranda) and
administrative (Garrity) must be kept
completely separate. Most Police depart-
ments wait for the criminal investigation
to be done before taking a Garrity state-
ment, but that’s by choice, not by law.
Chris "The Chump" Boyle
COMMENT: Hot Diggitty Dog, the
Chump loves one of these cases that is the
equivalent of a college level class- "4th
Amendment 101". This one is the legal
equivalent of a Chipotle burrito, just
chock full of good stuff (all of it bad for
somebody's health, but oh so tasty. In this
case it's bad for the chucklehead about to
be incarcerated, so we'll take a bite). A
nice refresher on numerous concepts im-
portant to law enforcement- plain view,
exclusionary rule, automobile exception,
res gestae statements….sorry, I passed
out there for a second when I re-read Of-
ficer Filler's assessment of the situation
at the bottom of paragraph # 4. ('Oh,
sh!t, he has a shotgun.'") Nice work
troops! Enjoy-
UNITED STATES V. PEREZ-BOSCANA,
2016 U.S. DIST. LEXIS 165557 (NO-
VEMBER 30, 2016 .)
Defendant Rolando Perez-Boscana has been
charged in a two-count Indictment with
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) (Count
One), and possession of an unregistered
shotgun, in violation of 26 U.S.C. 5861(d)
(Count Two). Presently before the Court is
Defendant's Motion to Suppress a shotgun
recovered from Defendant's van during a
warrantless search, as well as incriminating
post-arrest statements made by Defendant
during a subsequent drive to the police sta-
tion. We held a Hearing on the Motion on
September 22, 2016. For the reasons that
follow, we deny Defendant's Motion in its
entirety.
I. BACKGROUND
When Defendant testified during the Sep-
tember 22, 2016 Hearing, he admitted to
asking family members to commit perjury
on his behalf. 1 As a result, we have large-
ly discredited Defendant's version of the
events. The police officers involved in the
search and subsequent arrest of Defendant
credibly testified during the September 22,
2016 Hearing to the following facts. On the
evening of January 20, 2016, Philadelphia
Police Officers Robert Filler and George
Lane were on patrol in a marked patrol ve-
hicle in the neighborhood near Front Street
and Clearfield Street, searching for a suspect
in a double homicide that had taken place
nearby. (9/22/16 N.T. at 12-13, 40, 91.) Of-
ficers Filler and Lane patrolled that neigh-
borhood every night. (Id. at 90-91.) It is "a
high drug area, open air drug market, [with]
lots of violent crime, lots of guns, [and] lots
of robbers." (Id. at 90.)
1For example, during the September 22,
2016 Hearing, Defendant admitted to ask-
ing his sister, Millie, to testify that Defen-
dant found the shotgun in her home, even
though Defendant knew that Millie did not
know that the shotgun had been stored in
her home. (9/22/16 N.T. at 191,206-209.)
Additionally, Defendant's Hearing Testimo-
ny also unearthed falsehoods he told his fam-
ily about the shotgun. Defendant testified
that he did not tell the officers at any point
during their encounter that he intended to
turn the shotgun over to the police. (Id. at
197-99.) However, in a recorded telephone
call he made from prison on January 22,
Provided by Chris Boyle, Esq. and reprinted with permission from Marshall, Dennehey, Coleman
DECEMBER 2, 2016