Judge denies motion to suppress in Kenneth Wayne Huggins traffic-stop case
Loading...
Summary
A Dixon County judge denied a defense motion to suppress evidence arising from a March 6, 2023 traffic stop, finding agents had surveillance, wiretap information and observed traffic infractions that provided probable cause for the stop and a subsequent search; the court also found Miranda warnings were read and consent forms were signed on video.
A Dixon County judge on a motion hearing denied a request to suppress evidence collected after a March 6, 2023 traffic stop of Kenneth Wayne Huggins, saying investigators had probable cause based on surveillance, intercepted communications and observed traffic violations.
Special Agent Paul D'Arcangelo of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation testified investigators had been conducting long-term surveillance of a South Nashville residence and had intercepted wiretap calls and texts indicating someone would come to the house to purchase narcotics. "Our target of our investigation walked out to his vehicle ... and conducted what appeared to be a drug transaction to the passenger side window of the vehicle," D'Arcangelo told the court.
Trooper Devin Bargetzky of the Tennessee Highway Patrol said he was asked by a TBI agent to help stop a silver Honda Civic that had been observed receiving a bag and later traveling at high speed. Bargetzky said he paced the vehicle after it exited I-40 at Highway 96 and observed the defendant following too closely and entering a 45 mph zone at around 55 mph. On the scene, Bargetzky testified he smelled marijuana and the driver admitted there was a joint in the car; he said that gave him a basis to search further.
Defense counsel and the defendant disputed parts of the record shown to the court. Defendant Kenneth Wayne Huggins testified that a copy of the video his prior counsel had was different from the copy presented at the hearing and said some interaction had been edited out. Huggins also said the Miranda waiver shown on video bore a signature that was not his, though he acknowledged signing the separate consent form for a phone search.
The state urged the court to find probable cause based on the surveillance, the wiretap intercepts, the observed traffic behavior and the on-scene observations. The court reviewed testimony and video excerpts and concluded there was probable cause to stop and search the vehicle and that the search and statements were lawful. "The court finds that the motion is not well taken and denies the motion to suppress," the court said. The judge directed counsel to prepare a written order and set a status date in May.
The hearing record shows agents recovered multiple suspected drug packages and the defendant signed a written consent to search his phone; the transcript includes agent testimony that wiretap intercepts and a pole camera supported their belief a narcotics transaction occurred. The judge's ruling leaves the state evidence admissible for trial; the court scheduled a status date in May to revisit unresolved scheduling issues.
No trial date was announced at the hearing. Defense counsel indicated they may seek further review and asked to compare video copies and exhibit records before trial.
