Facts
In 2018, Terelle Johnson lived with his mother, Sherry Johnson, in her home in Stone County, Mississippi. On June 6, 2018, Sherry’s family members began to worry about her because no one had heard from her in a few days. Sherry’s brother, Derrick Johnson, whose house was approximately four hundred feet from Sherry’s house, went to her house to check on her. Johnson told Derrick that Sherry had gone on vacation. Derrick did not believe him because he opined that Sherry would never go on vacation without informing anyone, so he asked to check the house. Johnson refused to allow Derrick into the house, so the family called the authorities. On the same day, members of the Stone County Sheriff’s Department arrived at Sherry’s house to perform a welfare check as a result of the many phone calls they had received from her family members.
When officers, including Captain Boggs and Deputy Sharpe, arrived, Johnson was acting normally. Captain Boggs informed Johnson that he wanted to “holler” at the door for Sherry, and Johnson responded that he wanted a search warrant for that because he did not want anyone messing with his “stations.” Captain Boggs informed Johnson that he did not need a search warrant; he just needed to check whether Sherry was inside so that the family would stop calling them, and Deputy Sharpe informed Johnson that the family had called approximately twenty times. Captain Boggs asked that Johnson let him and Deputy Sharpe inside, and Johnson responded, “alright.”
Johnson led them inside the house, and Captain Boggs went to open the door to Sherry’s bedroom, but it was locked. Johnson explained that he had that door locked because his “station” was playing in there, and that no one was inside the room. When, seconds later, Captain Boggs asked Johnson if he had a key to the room, he said no because Sherry had locked the door and had left, and everything was safe in there. Captain Boggs and Deputy Sharpe then looked around the house and the back yard in search of Sherry. While Deputy Sharpe continued to search the back yard, Captain Boggs went inside and opened the locked door to Sherry’s bedroom. While Deputy Sharpe was still searching the back yard, Captain Boggs, having opened the locked door to Sherry’s bedroom, returned outside and told Deputy Sharpe that he believed that Johnson had stabbed Sherry.
When Captain Boggs informed him of this, Deputy Sharpe was using his flashlight to look around the back yard, still engaged in the observation of the back yard. At that point, the officers found Sherry’s decapitated body near some trees within an area of the back yard that they had not yet searched, approximately six feet inside of the privacy fence. Again, the area where Sherry was found was in a portion of the back yard that had not yet been searched by Deputy Sharpe, whose search of the back yard was ongoing. Sherry’s head was eventually located several feet outside the privacy fence.
The scene was then preserved, a search warrant was obtained, and the scene was processed by the Stone County Sheriff’s Department and the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation (MBI). Sherry’s bedroom contained large amounts of blood, including blood splatters in multiple places. It also contained two knives that had apparently been used to stab Sherry. Johnson was arrested, after which he twice confessed to killing Sherry. Major Schonewitz with the Sheriff’s Department interviewed him after Johnson waived his Miranda rights. During this recorded interview, Johnson confessed to killing Sherry. Further, Johnson’s phone calls while he was an inmate in the Stone County Jail were recorded. Johnson made a phone call to his father in which he confessed to killing Sherry.
In 2024, after rehabilitation in Whitfield, the trial court found Johnson competent to stand trial. Before trial, Johnson moved to suppress the evidence discovered through the warrantless search of the house. The trial court denied that motion. Ample evidence was introduced that Johnson and Sherry had been fighting over credit cards and money, and that Johnson falsely believed that Sherry was stealing money and cards from him. The jury found Johnson guilty of first-degree murder. The trial court sentenced him to life in custody.
Johnson appeals and argues the trial court erred by denying Johnson’s motion to suppress the evidence found as a result of the warrantless search of Johnson’s home. MSC affirmed.
Analysis
Johnson argues that the warrantless search was unconstitutional, while the State argues that several exceptions apply to allow the admission of evidence from the warrantless search, namely, consent, inevitable discovery, and exigent circumstances. Johnson argues that the consent was not knowing and voluntary because Captain Boggs misrepresented the law, and even if it was knowing and voluntary, Captain Boggs exceeded the scope of the consent when he opened the locked door to Sherry’s bedroom. He further argues that no exigent circumstances existed because no indication existed that Sherry was in danger at the time of the search. Last, Johnson argues that the evidence would not be inevitably discovered because obtaining a search warrant based on prior domestic calls was not certain.
Consent must be knowing and voluntary, and the person consenting must know of his right to refuse. The burden is on the defendant to prove impaired consent or diminished capacity. In determining whether consent is valid, a court looks at the totality of the circumstances, considering whether the circumstances were coercive, occurred while in the custody of law enforcement or occurred in the course of a station house investigation. The court must also look to the individual’s maturity, impressionability, experience and education. Further, the court should consider whether the person was excited, under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or mentally incompetent. If the consent occurred while the defendant was being generally cooperative, the consent is more likely to be voluntary; however, if the defendant agreed and then changed his mind, the consent should be suspect.
Johnson initially requested a search warrant, indicating he knew of his right to refuse. The testimony and video indicate that Johnson was behaving normally and was generally acting cooperatively with officers, and he quickly and agreeably changed his mind and led officers into the house. Further, he changed his mind after officers requested his permission to enter the house, which strongly implies that they would not enter unless Johnson allowed their entrance. Johnson was not under arrest or handcuffed at the time. Johnson did not present any evidence indicating that his mental state was compromised at the time of the consent. Therefore, he failed to meet his burden of proving impaired consent or diminished capacity.
Johnson then argues that the initial consent was exceeded by Captain Boggs opening a locked door. But this Court need not address whether consent was exceeded, because the inevitable-discovery doctrine applies. The inevitable-discovery exception to the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained by an illegal or warrantless search applies when the evidence or information “inevitably would have been discovered by lawful means.” See SCOTUS Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984). Captain Boggs and Deputy Sharpe initially entered the house lawfully based on Johnson’s consent. The body-camera video makes clear that when Captain Boggs opened the door to Sherry’s bedroom and, in response, returned outside, Deputy Sharpe was still actively engaged in searching the back yard based on the consent search. Had Captain Boggs not returned outside, it was inevitable that Deputy Sharpe would have found Sherry’s headless body during his ongoing search of the back yard.
He simply had not yet made it to the area where her body was located, but he had not concluded his search when Captain Boggs alerted him to the findings in the bedroom. Additionally, Sherry’s head was found on the outside of the privacy fence, making it more susceptible to being found. And, at the point of finding Sherry’s headless body, officers would have been able to obtain a search warrant even without the information found in the bedroom. Thus, the same evidence in the same condition would have been introduced at trial. Therefore, the trial court did not err by denying Johnson’s motion to suppress.