Photo credit: Bigstock

A federal appeals court has reversed a ruling suppressing a suspect's confession that he had cocaine in his car, which was coaxed out of him by a loquacious state trooper prior to the reading of Miranda rights.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected the government's first appellate argument in the prosecution of Gary Bradley—that the physical evidence should not have been suppressed because the statements Bradley made before receiving Miranda warnings were made voluntarily—because prosecutors did not bring it up at trial.

However, according to Third Circuit Judge Kent Jordan's precedential May 15 opinion, "the government's second argument, that the cocaine would inevitably have been discovered because Bradley's vehicle would have been subject to an inventory search, has merit. We will, therefore, vacate the district court's order to the extent it suppressed the physical evidence and remand for it to decide whether any supplementation of the record is needed to decide whether that physical evidence would have been inevitably discovered, and, if so, whether police department policy sufficiently cabined the scope of the officer's discretion in conducting the inventory search such that the search of the backpack, a closed container, would have been lawful."

Pennsylvania state trooper Wesley Johnson pulled over Bradley in February 2018 for speeding, according to Johnson's opinion. Noticing that Bradley was nervous and suspecting criminal activity, Johnson played it cool by acting friendly and sympathetic to Bradley.

Johnson coaxed Bradley into his police cruiser where he was able to get Bradley to admit he was driving without a license and that he had a drug conviction. According to Jordan, Johnson made frequent comments to build a rapport with Bradley, like "Take a deep breath, bud, take a deep breath," and frequently called him "bro," "bud" and "my man." He told Bradley he would try to "cut him a break."

Eventually, Johnson said he would let Bradley go with a warning—though the trooper said at a suppression hearing that he never actually intended to. He called for backup and another trooper arrived, Jordan said. After that, Johnson asked Bradley again if there was anything in his car, and he admitted to carrying cocaine.

Bradley was convicted on drug possession charges, but appealed claiming the evidence was inadmissible because he confessed before Johnson read him his Miranda rights. The government argued that it didn't matter because, since Johnson was already suspicious of Bradley, his car would have been searched and the cocaine found anyway.

"Given Trooper Johnson's testimony concerning police procedure and the course he would have taken once Bradley's ineligibility to drive had been revealed, and given that the cocaine was inside a backpack that was in plain view when the trunk of the rental car was opened, it seems probable that the police would have discovered the cocaine in an inventory search," Jordan said. "But more information on police procedures—including protocols for the conduct of an inventory search and the scope of an officer's discretion during such a search— is likely needed before making a final determination on inevitable discovery."

Bradley's public defender, Ronald Krauss, did not respond to a request for comment. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania did not respond to a request for comment.