PEOPLE OF MI V MONTEZ ANTHONY BROOKS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
UNPUBLISHED
June 17, 1997
Plaintiff-Appellant
v
No. 190278
Washtenaw Circuit Court
LC No. 95-4015 FH
MONTEZ ANTHONY BROOKS,
Defendant-Appellee
Before: White, P.J, and MacKenzie and E. R. Post*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). In reviewing a
trial court’s decision on a motion to suppress evidence as seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment
and/or Const 1963, art 1, §11, the trial court’s findings of historical fact are reviewed under the clearly
erroneous standard, but all other questions, whether of law or mixed questions of law and fact, are
required to be reviewed de novo to assure uniformity of application of the federal Constitution.
Ornelas v United States, 517 US ___; 116 S Ct 1657; 134 L Ed 2d 911, 919-920 (1996).
Here, the trial court’s findings of historical fact are not challenged as being clearly erroneous,
and are accepted by this Court. Those findings include that defendant was validly stopped for a traffic
infraction, validly placed in custodial arrest when it was learned that he was driving with a suspended
license, and that a search of his person and vehicle incident to that arrest disclosed a small amount of
marijuana and documents relating to an apartment at 1309 Huron in the City of Ann Arbor. On being
taken to police headquarters and advised of his Miranda rights, defendant waived his right of silence
and his right to counsel and when questioned by police denied being a resident of apartment number
two at 1309 Huron, instead giving one residence as his official residence for parole purposes, and a
second residence as one being shared with Taniesha Ford. Ms. Ford confirmed that defendant resided
with her on Grove Street, while defendant’s parole address was on Monroe Street.
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1
Charlotte Hall came to police headquarters and confirmed that she was the lessee of apartment
number two at 1309 Huron. Hall and defendant had lived there together but had moved out. Hall had
attempted to cancel the lease but had been unable to do so.
On these facts, consent to search the apartment was given by a person possessing adequate
authority over the premises. The circuit court’s order granting defendant’s m
otion to suppress is
reversed.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We do not retain
jurisdiction.
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Barbara B. MacKenzie
/s/ Edward R. Post
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.