United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Central Division
OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
ROBERTO A. LANGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Facts Relevant to Motion to Suppress
January 31, 2017, Daniel Reynolds, a police officer for the
Rosebud Sioux Tribe, responded to a domestic dispute call at
a house in Rosebud, South Dakota. T. 9-10. Upon entering the
house, Officer Reynolds located Calvin Gillette and Lucille
Running Enemy, the alleged victim, in a back bedroom. T. 11;
Ex. 1 at 00:45-01:00. Officer Reynolds handcuffed Gillette,
took him out to the living room to sit on a couch, and went
back down the hall to speak with Running Enemy. Ex. 1 at
01:00-04:10. Gillette interjected several times while Running
Enemy spoke to Officer Reynolds, saying "I'm
sorry" and that he "didn't know what
happened." Ex. 1 at 02:26-04:15. Officer Reynolds
eventually turned his attention to Gillette, who by that time
had left the couch, walked closer to where Officer Reynolds
and Running Enemy were standing, and addressed Officer
Reynolds directly. Ex. 1 at 02:26-04:15. The following
exchange took place:
Officer Reynolds: Okay, what, what happened, Calvin?
Gillette: I didn't know what happened last night. I
don't remember coming home.
Officer Reynolds: Were, were you drinking, or what?
Gillette: Yeah, yeah yesterday was my homeboy's memorial.
Officer Reynolds: Okay.
Gillette: And uh, that-and I asked her, did I mizz out? And
she was like yeah, and I felt bad enough for that and I was
like okay, you want me to go, I'll go.
Officer Reynolds: Mmm hmm.
Gillette: And it just took off from there. You know, we
started arguing after that, and I just-
04:05-04:45. This discussion, which Judge Moreno referred to
as the "initial statements, " ended when Running
Enemy interrupted Gillette midsentence. Ex. 1 at 04:40.
Running Enemy and Gillette then argued about what occurred
until Officer Reynolds cut the parties off and told Running
Enemy to get her sister, Amanda Roubideaux, from one of the
back rooms in the house. Ex. 1 at 04:40-06:10. Roubideaux
spoke briefly with Officer Reynolds in the hall, but Gillette
kept interrupting her. Ex. 1 at 06:30-07:30. Officer Reynolds
then went over with Gillette to the couch in the living room,
finished packing Gillette's bag, and prepared him to
leave. Ex. 1 at 7:30-10:45. While doing so, Officer Reynolds
and Gillette conversed about Gillette's belongings and
the fact that he was being arrested for domestic abuse. Ex. 1
at 07:30-10:45. Gillette asked to speak to Running Enemy
during this conversation but Officer Reynolds refused to let
him. Ex. 1 at 08:55-09:05. Once outside the home, Gillette
took off running. Ex. 1 at' 10:42; T. 16. Officer
Reynolds eventually found Gillette in the basement of a
nearby house and took him to the tribal jail. Ex. 1; T. 17.
Rosebud Sioux Tribe charged Gillette with multiple crimes,
including domestic abuse of Running Enemy. Ex. 2. In May
2017, Gillette appeared with counsel in tribal court and
pleaded guilty to the domestic assault and several other
charges. Exs. 3, 4. Four months later, a federal grand jury
indicted Gillette for domestic assault by a habitual
offender. Doc. 1. This federal charge arose from the same
incident with Running Enemy that Gillette had pleaded guilty
to in tribal court. Gillette filed two motions to suppress,
the first arguing that his statements are inadmissible under
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), Doc. 31,
and the second arguing that his tribal court guilty plea is
inadmissible under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, Doc. 33.
Magistrate Judge Mark A. Moreno held a hearing on these
motions at which he heard testimony from Officer Reynolds and
received into evidence a video recording from the body camera
Officer Reynolds was wearing during his encounter with
Gillette, a transcript of the audio from this video, an audio
recording of Gillette's tribal court guilty plea, and the
complaint and judgment from the tribal court case. Judge
Moreno recommended granting Gillette's motion to suppress
his statements in part, concluding that while Gillette's
initial statements were voluntary, they were the result of
custodial interrogation and therefore inadmissible under
Miranda in the government's case in chief. Doc.
44. However, Judge Moreno concluded that Gillette's
"later statements"-meaning those he made while
arguing with Running Enemy until he was apprehended outside
the house-were admissible because they were not made in
response to interrogation. As to the tribal court guilty
plea, Judge Moreno recommended denying Gillette's motion
to suppress, finding that neither the Fifth nor Sixth
Amendments prohibited the government from offering the plea
at trial. Doc. 44. Gillette has now objected to the report
and recommendation. Doc. 45.
Court reviews a report and recommendation under the statutory
standards found in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), which provides
in relevant part that "[a] judge of the [district] court
shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the
report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to
which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).