TN: Nexus shown to cell phone in murder case

The trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress the search of his cell phone in a murder case. On the state’s interlocutory appeal, suppression is reversed. There was sufficient nexus shown between the cell phone and the offense under investigation before and after the killing. State v. Archey, 2025 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 119 (Mar. 7, 2025):

Giving deference to the magistrate, we conclude that it did not err when it determined that the affidavit provided probable cause to support the search warrant. The affidavit provided a sufficient nexus between the murders and a search of the cell phone. The affidavit included the statement of a witness, Ms. Smotherman, who said that the Defendant was at the scene of the murders when they occurred. The Defendant asked Ms. Smotherman about where she, victim Tindale and victim Hill had been in the nights before the shooting. He then walked the victim outside, told her to put her hands over her ears, went back into the residence, and Ms. Smotherman heard six gunshots. The Defendant escorted Ms. Smotherman back inside the house where she heard Ms. Hill say, “don’t kill me.” She then heard another gunshot. The Defendant told Ms. Smotherman that there were “two brothers” in the room with the victims.

The affidavit also included statements from the Defendant’s girlfriend, Ms. Partin. Ms. Partin offered her phone to law enforcement officers who saw that the Defendant had communicated with Ms. Partin by phone on several occasions on the day of the murder before it occurred and the day after the murder. In a subsequent interview, Ms. Partin said that the Defendant admitted shooting Ms. Hill. He also told her that Mr. Tindale was in his vehicle when the Defendant arrived, and the Defendant took Mr. Tindale inside. Ms. Partin said that she had seen the Defendant with a sawed-off shotgun.

The affidavit also detailed how the Defendant contacted investigators two days after the shooting, using his cell phone. The Defendant spoke with two different sets of investigators and twice denied being present at the shooting scene. He later changed his story and said that he was present when the gunshots were fired but that he had been kidnapped by two unknown masked men and taken to the residence. At first, the Defendant gave officers consent to look at his phone, which showed that he had made several phone calls using Facebook Messenger after the killings occurred.