Court Watch: Judge Denies Motion to Suppress Evidence in Shopping Cart Case

YoloCourt

WOODLAND, Calif. — A Yolo County Superior Court judge denied a motion to suppress evidence Wednesday following a contentious hearing in which the defense argued a homeless man was unlawfully detained without probable cause while walking with a shopping cart.

On April 9, a motion to suppress hearing took place with efforts from the defense that argued there was no probable cause in the arrest of a homeless man walking around with a shopping cart. The defense stated that Woodland Police Officer Nicholas Shriver’s facts changed after testifying under oath in a prior preliminary hearing. Judge Catherine Rayhill denied the motion to suppress.

Officer Shriver took the stand to testify. The district attorney asked him questions pertaining to his recollection of events during the arrest, specifically about restating the store that the shopping cart belonged to and whether Officer Shriver had any memory of making a mistake on his initial police report.

Officer Shriver stated that only minor mistakes on the report were made, such as a misremembering of the specific store due to the accused obstructing the shopping cart.

Defense Attorney K. DeAnda played the body camera footage and highlighted to the courtroom that Officer Shriver had stated the store on the shopping cart various times throughout the footage and verbally said it to the accused during the detention.

The defense began to ask Officer Shriver questions about his contact with the store manager, and how that contact was made, if any.

Officer Shriver stated the manager of the store was driving down the road when they saw the arrest taking place and the shopping cart belonging to their store. This prompted the store manager to pull over and state that the shopping carts cost $150, according to the officer.

The defense forwarded the body camera footage to the point where contact was made with the store manager. The footage showed Officer Shriver contacting the Harbor Freight assistant manager through a phone call, asking if they would like to prosecute. The assistant store manager made a unanimous decision with the head store manager not to press charges against the accused. No dollar amount of the shopping cart’s value was ever stated throughout the entirety of the phone call.

Judge Rayhill stated that the defense must no longer pause the body camera footage and ask Officer Shriver questions of “every moment.”

The defense argued the importance of having a record of the officer’s testimony on paper. The judge stated the video was enough for the record.

The defense reiterated the importance of establishing the facts around how contact was made with the store manager and the name of the store that owned the shopping cart, because a preliminary hearing was held prior to the current case where Officer Shriver stated under oath a different name of the store, which changed the distance between where the shopping cart was found and where it was supposed to be located. The officer also stated a different recollection of how he got into contact with the store manager and how their discussion went.

It was also argued that the officer had no probable cause for the arrest and that the accused was unlawfully detained. The accused was detained for 30 minutes until a proper investigation occurred. The officer stated he believed the accused stole from a store because he saw a child’s shoe in the shopping cart. He checked through the shopping cart for stolen items and prohibited items that violated the accused’s probation.

No stolen or prohibited items were found in the first 30 minutes of detention.

Deputy District Attorney Stephanie DeCillIs argued that Officer Shriver acted in good faith and within proper legal parameters for the public’s best interest to detain an individual suspected of committing a crime.

The defense pushed back on this notion by bringing up Officer Shriver’s uncertainty about the merit behind his arrest in a report he had written to the district attorney in the prior preliminary hearing.

Judge Rayhill rejected the motion to suppress, ruling that no unlawful detention took place and that Officer Shriver acted within legal reason to detain.

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and FacebookSubscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Breaking News Court Watch Northern California Court Watch Vanguard Court Watch Yolo County

Tags:

Author

  • Bradley Aguinada

    Bradley Aguinada is a fourth-year Criminology Major at UC Irvine. He is passionate about law and its legal aspects, and aspires to one day be in a position where he can provide legal representation for marginalized communities.

    View all posts

Leave a Comment