| Probable cause affidavit: |
SUBMITTED By: REEVES, CHRISTOPHER 0663 (AR10115035) DID UNLAWFULLY ENTER OR REMAIN IN A CERTAIN STRUCTURE OR CURTILAGE THEREOF, TO-WIT: AN OCCUPIED DWELLING, LOCATED ON WEST INN LANE, IN THE COUNTY AND STATE AFORESAID, THE PROPERTY OF THE VICTIM, WITHOUT SAID PERSON'S CONSENT, WITH THE INTENT TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE THEREIN, TO-WIT: THEFT, IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATUTE 810.02(1) AND 810.02(4); DID AGREE, CONSPIRE, COMBINE, OR CONFEDERATE WITH ANOTHER PERSON OR PERSONS TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE, TO WIT: BURGLARY, IN VIOLATION OF FLORIDA STATE STATUTE 777.04(3) ON 052610, AT APPROXIMATELY 1928 HOURS, I WAS DISPATCHED TO 7749 WEST INN LANE IN HOMOSASSA, IN REFERENCE TO A POSSIBLE BURGLARY IN PROGRESS. WHILE EN ROUTE, I OBSERVED JUVENILE DEFENDANT ONE AND DEFENDANT TWO MR ANTHONY HALL ALONG WITH SEVERAL other INDIVIDUALS TO BE STANDING ON THE SHOULDER OF THE ROAD ON WEST INN LANE AND SOUTH ALABAMA AVENUE. UPON ARRIVAL AT THE RESIDENCE, I MADE CONTACT WITH WITNESS ONE WHO ADVISED THAT APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL HE WAS ON THE COMPUTER INSIDE OF HIS RESIDENCE, WHEN HE OBSERVED THREE WHITE MALES WALKING IN the STREET IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE. WITNESS ONE ADVISED THAT TWO OF THE MALES WERE WEARING TANK TOPS, ONE BEING WHITE IN COLOR AND THE OTHER BEING A LIGHT COLORED TANK TOP. HE ADVISED THESE TWO MALES WERE ALSO WEARING SHORTS. WITNESS ONE ADVISED THE THIRD MALE WAS WEARING EITHER A RED SHIRT OR RED SHORTS. HE ADVISED THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS APPEARED TO HAVE SHORT HAIR AND WERE TALLER THAN HE WAS. WITNESS ONE STATED HE OBSERVED ALL THREE MALES HIDING BEHIND A TALL PINE TREE WHICH IS IN HIS FRONT YARD AND APPROXIMATELY 30 SECONDS LATER, THE TWO MALES WEARING TANK TOPS BEGAN WALKING FROM BEHIND THE TREE TOWARDS HIS RESIDENCE WITH THEIR SHIRTS PULLED OVER THEIR HEADS. WITNESS ONE STATED THAT THE MALE WITH the WHITE SHIRT BEGAN WALKING TO THE EAST SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AND THE OTHER MALE SUBJECT BEGAN WALKING TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE. HE FURTHER STATED THAT HE THEN RAN AND HID IN the BEDROOM BUT COULD HEAR THE SUBJECTS ATTEMPTING TO OPEN the FRONT DOOR, THE BACK DOOR, AND FOR THEM TO BE BANGING ON THE GARAGE DOOR. I THEN OBSERVED THE YARD AROUND THE RESIDENCE AND DID FIND SEVERAL SHOE IMPRESSIONS IN the DIRT IN FRONT OF THE EAST SIDE GARAGE DOOR. I ALSO OBSERVED SEVERAL VARIOUS DISTINCT SHOE PRINTS ON the EAST SIDE GARAGE DOOR WHICH WERE MADE BY THE SAME SHOE. I THEN REQUESTED THAT THE ON CALL ID AND EVIDENCE CRIME SCENE TECHNICIAN (CST) RESPOND TO THE INCIDENT LOCATION, AT WHICH TIME CST VON STADDEN DID RESPOND TO PROCESS THE SCENE; SEE THE CST REPORT. I THEN MADE CONTACT with DEFENDANT ONE AT the CORNER OF INN LANE AND ALABAMA AVENUE WHERE DETECTIVE BLAIR, DEPUTY HAYNES, AND SEVERAL OTHER DEPUTIES WERE OUT WITH THE INDIVIDUALS. DEFENDANT ONE WAS WEARING A WHITE TANK TOP AND LIGHT COLORED SHORTS WITH MICHAEL JORDAN FLIP-FLOPS. I THEN OBSERVED THE BOTTOM OF DEFENDANT ONE'S SHOES AND THEY WERE the EXACT SAME SHOES WHICH WERE USED IN KICKING THE DOOR AS WELL AS THE PATTERN FOUND IN the DIRT IN FRONT OF THE DOOR AT THE INCIDENT LOCATION. AT THAT TIME DETECTIVE BLAIR READ DEFENDANT ONE HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS VIA HIS PREPRINTED AGENCY CARD and ASKED HIM IF HE UNDERSTOOD HIS RIGHTS, TO WHICH HE REPLIED HE DID. HE THEN ASKED HIM IF HE WISHED TO SPEAK with US AT HIS TIME, TO WHICH HE REPLIED HE WOULD. DEFENDANT ONE STATED THAT HE HAD WALKED PAST THE INCIDENT LOCATION THROUGH the WOODS HEADING TOWARD THE LIBRARY BUT DID NOT GO TOWARDS THE RESIDENCE. HE LATER CHANGED HIS STORY AND STATED THAT HE HAD TOLD DEFENDANT TWO AND ANOTHER SUSPECT THAT HE HAD BEEN "SCOPING" THE INCIDENT LOCATION OUT FOR SEVERAL DAYS and THAT HE WAS GOING TO "ROB" AND "HIT" THE HOUSE. DEFENDANT ONE STATED THAT ALL THREE INDIVIDUALS THEN WALKED DOWN TO THE RESIDENCE WHERE THEY HID BEHIND THE TREE. DEFENDANT ONE PULLED HIS SHIRT OVER HIS HEAD, APPROACHED THE RESIDENCE AND ATTEMPTED TO OPEN the DOORS, AND HE DID KICK THE EAST SIDE GARAGE DOOR WITH THE SAME SHOES THAT HE CURRENTLY WAS WEARING IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENTER THE RESIDENCE. HE STATED THAT NEITHER DEFENDANT TWO NOR THE OTHER SUSPECT HAD ANY INVOLVEMENT IN THE MATTER; HOWEVER, THEY WERE STILL ON SCENE AND LEFT JUST PRIOR TO HIM LEAVING AFTER NOT HAVING GAINED ENTRY TO the RESIDENCE. I THEN ADVISED DEFENDANT ONE HE WAS UNDER ARREST AND ASKED HIM TO PLACE HIS HANDS BEHIND HIS BACK. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PLACE DEFENDANT ONE IN HANDCUFFS, HE PULLED HIS ARM AWAY FROM ME AND YELLED :"GET OFF ME NIGGA", AT WHICH TIME I ATTEMPTED TO REGAIN CONTROL OF HIS ARM AND HE AGAIN PULLED AWAY FROM ME AND BEGAN TENSING HIS BODY and PULLING AWAY AS IF HE WERE ABOUT TO RUN. I THEN ATTEMPTED TO PLACE THE DEFENDANT ON THE GROUND AND HE CONTINUED STRUGGLING UNTIL DEPUTY HAYNES DEPLOYED HIS TASER STRIKING DEFENDANT ONE IN THE LOWER BACK. I WAS THEN ABLE TO GAIN CONTROL OF HIS HANDS AND PLACED HIM IN HANDCUFFS (DOUBLE-LOCKED) BEHIND HIS PERSON AND SECURED HIM IN the REAR SEAT OF MY PATROL VEHICLE. AT THAT TIME DETECTIVE BLAIR PLACED HIS HAND HELD RECORDER IN THE VEHICLE AND LEFT IT RUN. I LATER REVIEWED THE RECORDING AND DEFENDANT ONE MADE SEVERAL STATEMENTS IN REGARDS TO HIM HAVING "SCOPED" THE HOUSE OUT FOR A WHILE AND THAT HE WAS GOING TO "HIT IT". DEFENDANT ONE ALSO MADE SEVERAL STATEMENTS AS TO INFORMING DEFENDANT TWO AND THE other SUSPECT SEVERAL DAYS PRIOR TO HIM ATTEMPTING TO ENTER THE RESIDENCE. DEFENDANT ONE ALSO STATED ON the RECORDING THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST RESIDENCE THAT HE HAD ATTEMPTED TO BREAK INTO WHERE HE DID NOT RING THE DOORBELL AND HE GOT CAUGHT. DETECTIVE BLAIR LATER CONTACTED ME WHILE STILL ON SCENE AND ADVISED THAT WITNESS TWO HAD SEEN DEFENDANT ONE, DEFENDANT TWO, AND THE OTHER SUSPECT RETURNING TO THE CORNER OF WEST INN LANE AND SOUTH ALABAMA AVENUE LEAVING THE INCIDENT LOCATION ON FOOT. HE FURTHER ADVISED THAT WITNESS NUMBER THREE HAD SEEN DEFENDANT NUMBER TWO RETURNING FROM THE INCIDENT LOCATION FROM BEHIND THE BUSHES ON WEST INN LANE. DEFENDANT HALL WAS THEN PLACED IN HAND DOUBLE LOCKED BEHIND HIS PERSON AND SECURED IN THE REAR SEAT OF MY PATROL VEHICLE AS WELL. the DEFENDANT WAS CHARGED WITH ONE COUNT OF ATTEMPTED BURGLARY TO AN OCCUPIED DWELLING BOND SET AT $5,000 PER THE BOND SCHEDULE. THE DEFENDANT WAS ALSO CHARGED WITH ONE COUNT OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, BOND SET AT $1,000 PER THE BOND SCHEDULE. *NOT-EXEMPT* |
