Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-2091-2003COMMONWEALTH BLAINE MASON NORRIS IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE BEFORE BAYLEY, J. OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., March 31, 2004:-- Defendant, Blaine Norris, is charged with: criminal homicide (murder in the first degree),1 criminal conspiracy with Brian Thomas Trimble to criminal homicide,2 criminal conspiracy with Brian Thomas Trimble to insurance fraud,3 and criminal attempt to insurance fraud.4 Defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of execution of four search warrants. A hearing was conducted on March 2, 2004. We will review the warrants seriatim. I. DEFENDANT'S APARTMENT -- SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED ON APRIL 17, 2003 BY JUDGE RICHARD A. LEWIS OF THE 12TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT- DAUPHIN COUNTY 1 18 Pa.C.S. § 2501, 2502(a) and 306. 2 18 Pa.C.S. § 903 to Section 2501 and/or Section 2502. 3 18 Pa.C.S. § 903 to Section 4117. 4 18 Pa.C.S. § 901 to Section 4117. CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 The affidavit of probable cause for the issuance of this search warrant sets forth: IDENTIFY ITEMS TO BE SEARCHED FOR AND SEIZED: 1. Any and all computer systems, including desktops, laptops, Hand held [sic] computers, and associated equipment and peripherals. Computer hardware, including, but not limited to central processing units (CPU's), monitors, keyboards, laptops, hard disk drives, floppy disk drives, tape drivers, CD-ROM/CD-DVD drives, thumb drives, external zip drives, and any and all external peripherals including scanners, digital cameras, and video cameras. Any and all software and computer manuals located in the residence. Any and all floppy disks, CD-ROM disks, rewritable CD disks, memory cards, or devices capable of electronic media storage. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES AND/OR PERSON TO BE SEARCHED: The residence of Blaine Mason Norris, White male individual, DOB: 11- 08-1977; SSN: 321-66-8809; address residing: 817 N. Second Street, Apt. # 3, Harrisburg, PA 17102. AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: On the date of January 10, 2003, at approximately 8:10 PM, the body of Randi Lee TRIMBLE was discovered in the garage of her residence at 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, by her husband, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, when, allegedly, he returned home from having dinner with a friend, Jason SHANK, in Lancaster County. An autopsy was performed on the body of the victim on Monday, January 13, 2003 by Dr. Saralee FUNKE, a Forensic Pathologist. She was assisted by Cumberland County Coroner Michael NORRIS. According to Dr. FUNKE, the victim died of multiple stab wounds and strangulation, and that the cause of death was homicide. There were at least twenty- seven (27) stabs and cuts on the victim's body, including a deep, gaping gash into the right side, not the front, of the victim's neck, that displayed what appeared to have been outward tearing. During a search of the residence for forensic evidence by investigators, a scuba-type knife in a black, plastic scabbard was found in the basement. -2- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 Brian Thomas TRIMBLE told investigators that this knife belongd [sic] to him, although he did not scuba dive. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE even told investigators that the five holes in the handle were finger grips, so that the knife wouldn't slip out of one's hands underwater. This knife was submitted to the Pennsylvania State Police Crime Lab for analysis. Jeff WAGNER, a Forensic Chemist with the Pennsylvania State Police Crime Lab traced a full-size drawing of this knife and gave this drawing to investigators. Investigators met with Coroner Michael NORRIS and he advised them that, even though the wounds were of different sizes, they could have been made by the same weapon, and the size difference was probably due to movement of the knife, as in slicing while stabbing. He also said that some of the wounds displayed a twisting of the blade. Investigators then showed him the life-size drawing of the seized knife, and he thought this weapon could possibly have made the wounds. He faxed the drawing of this weapon to Dr. FUNKE, and Dr. FUNKE told him that this weapon could have caused the wounds made to the body of the victim, Randi Lee TRIMBLE. While investigators were at the residence of the victim, the computer, located in a room used as a study, was seized and a search warrant was obtained for its contents. The computer was submitted to Thomas TARSAVAGE, a computer crime investigator for the Pennsylvania State Police, who advised investigators that he found in the files of the computer a download that he described as "recent," and he turned over a printed copy of this download, entitled, "Hit Man On-Line." This 54-page, on-line articles [sic] appears to be a condensed version of a book written by a person known as Rex FERAL, and published by PALADIN PRESS. The author calls his work a "technical manual for independent contractors," a euphemism for what is commonly referred to as a hit man, or murderer for hire. In this on-line article the author advises that he prefers a firearm as a weapon of choice, but, if an alternative is necessary, he describes a certain type of knife that he recommends, along with the reason for his choice. He describes this knife as having a six-inch blade, double-edged, and the blade should have a serrated section, for making efficient, quiet kills. The double edge, combined with the serrated section and the six-inch length will ensure a deep, ragged tear, and the wound will be difficult, if not impossible, to close without prompt medical attention. The scuba-type knife, found in the victim's residence, and claimed by Brian Thomas TRIMBLE as belonging to him, -3- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 had a double-edged blade, with a serrated section, although the blade was four (4) inches in length, instead of the six (6) recommended by the author. The author advises to "twist the knife before you withdraw (it)." The author then advises, "Movies and ficticious [sic] stories like to show the cutting of the victim's throat as a slice from ear to ear. However, this is not the best, or preferred method. Using your six-inch serrated blade knife, stab deeply into the side of the victim's neck and push the knife forward in a forceful movement. This method will half-decapitate the victim, cutting both his main arteries and windpipe, ensuring immediate death." This part of the instruction is consistent with the wound on the right side of the victim's neck, even though the perpetrator failed to slice the main arteries of the victim. The on-line manual also speaks of staging a burglary, such as investigators believe was done in this case, in order to conceal the true motive for the homicide. There was ransacking throught [sic] the home of the victim, but no indications of a true burglary. The author also advised to wipe fingerprints from everything, including the weapon used. No fingerprints were found in this investigation. The author tells the reader to "drag the body out of the view of windows and doors so that discovery can be delayed." Patterns in the blood in which the victim was found lying, clearly indicate that the victim was dragged about four (4) feet, from one area to another. The author of this "manual" offers encouragement to a would-be murderer by telling him that law enforcement, by their own admission, clear little more than twenty (20) percent of reported crimes, and, of those arrested, less than half are convicted. He states "....the American Justice System is so bogged down in technicalities, overcrowded jails, plea bargaining, and a host of other problems that even if charged with a serious crime, we can rest assured that the law is on our side and rarely that of the victim." Pennsylvania Computer Crimes Investigator Thomas TARSAVAGE told investigators on the date of April 16, 2003, that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE sent the internet link to this download, "Hitman On-Line," to the computer of Blaine Mason NORRIS on the date of January 2, 2003, eight (8) days prior to the murder of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's wife, Randi Lee TRIMBLE, and four (4) days prior to a visit by Blaine Mason NORRIS to the residence of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, on January 6, -4- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 2003, when Brian Thomas TRIMBLE took off work and stayed at home. Blaine Mason NORRIS was seen by a neighbor leaving Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence in the early afternoon of January 6, 2003, and, when confronted by investigators about this visit, Blaine Mason NORRIS at first tried to deny it happened. During a Grand Jury appearance, for which he was subpoenaed, Blaine Mason NORRIS admitted that he was at Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence on January 6, 2003, saying that this must have been the day they both went to lunch at Taco Bell. Your Affiant is requesting that this search warrant be sealed because this continuing investigation is a matter before the Fourth Cumberland County Investigating Grand Jury, and this affidavit contains information known only to investigators and the Grand Jury, and disclosure of such investigative information at this time would seriously impair the ability of the Commonwealth to garner truth [sic] testimony from witnesses who will be subpoenaed to appear befoe [sic] the Grand Jury. Defendant maintains that all evidence seized pursuant to the execution of this warrant must be suppressed because: a) in the affidavit of probable cause, no nexus is made between Defendant's personal computer and related items and the other allegations pertaining to the killing; b) the police never aver why they are seeking Defendant's personal computer and related items; c) the police fail to even aver that the items sought are connected with any criminal activity; d) by contrast, for example, in the affidavit of probable cause of the search warrant executed on Brian Trimble's apartment on May 10, 2003, the police make a detailed connection between their allegations and his personal computer and related items, and specifically state why they are seeking them; e) there was a lack of probable cause/insufficient probable cause to justify the issuance of the aforesaid warrant; and f) the warrant is facially defective because the date of application is "04-14-2003" and yet the affidavit of probable cause cites information received on April 16, 2003, two days later. In Commonwealth v. Waltson, 555 Pa. 223 (1998), the Supreme Court of -5- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 Pennsylvania stated that: Probable cause is determined based on the totality of the circumstances. The totality of the circumstances test is satisfied where the police officers have a reasonable belief that the items to be seized are related to criminal conduct and that those items are presently located in the place to be searched. ·.. a warrant must describe the place to be searched and the items to be seized with specificity, and the warrant must be supported by probable cause. The affidavit for the search warrant sets forth information provided by Brian Thomas Trimble, which is against his penal interest, that he conspired with defendant for defendant to kill his wife. Investigators discovered that the killing occurred in a manner resembling suggestions in an on-line article "Hitman On-line" which Trimble sent on-line to defendant eight days before the murder and four days before defendant visited the Trimble residence in furtherance of their conspiracy to kill Trimble's wife. The nexus and parallel between the article and the homicide involved the manner in which the victim was killed, the way in which the victim's home was ransacked with no indication of a true burglary, that there were no identifiable fingerprints recovered, and that the blood patterns showed that the victim was dragged from one place to another. The search warrant sought only the seizure of defendant's computer and related systems for which there was probable cause to believe that there would be evidence of the conspiracy to commit homicide between defendant and Trimble.5 5 On May 14, 2003, the police obtained another search warrant issued by Judge Lewis to access the computer equipment seized upon the execution of this search warrant on April 17, 2003. -6- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 As to defendant's assertion that the search warrant is facially defective because of the date put on the application, testimony was taken at the hearing on March 2, 2004. Detective Kurt Vogenreitter testified that the April 14, 2003, "Date Of Application" on the search warrant was a typographical error. The date was actually April 17, 2003, the same date Detective Vogenreitter swore both the application for the search warrant and the affidavit of probable cause before Judge Lewis, the date that Judge Lewis issued the search warrant, and the date that the warrant was served. Pa.R. Crim. P. 206, which sets forth the contents of an application for a search warrant, does not require that it be dated. Rule 205, which sets forth the contents of a search warrant, requires only that the date and time of issuance be set forth. Even the omission of the date and time of issuance of the search warrant will be considered fatal only if it deprives a court of the ability to review the propriety of the issuance and execution of the warrant. Commonwealth v. Vegley, 780 A.2d 605 (Pa. 2001); Commonwealth v. Schilling, 312 Pa. Super. 43 (1983). Clearly, in the present case the typographical error as to the date of the application is of no legal significance. II. DEFENDANT'S APARTMENT - SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED ON MAY 9, 2003 BY JUDGE LAWRENCE F. CLARK, JR. OF THE 12TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT- DAUPHIN COUNTY The affidavit of probable cause for the issuance of this search warrant sets forth: IDENTIFY ITEMS TO BE SEARCHED FOR AND SEIZED: Records, journals, diaries, notes, electronic data, photographs, video, -7- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 digitial [sic] images, letters, audio recordings, written recordings, visual depictions, either by hand and/or electronically recorded that describe, or are associated with the murder of Randi Trimble. A duffle type bag, dark in color, dark or black clothing, including cammoflauge [sic] masks to cover the face, hand gloves of a cloth material and/or hand gloves of a rubber or latex material, a knife and a strap-on knife sheath secured by two straps, a semi-automatic .22 caliber handgun. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES AND/OR PERSON TO BE SEARCHED: a [sic] red brick three story building at the Southeast corner of the intersection of Forester and N. 2® St., Harrisburg City. The building is marked 817. Within this building I request to search an apartment located the second floor accessed from the rear of the building by a steel stair structure, no other apartments on the second floor can be entered in this fashion. AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: On the date of January 10, 2003, at approximately 8:10 PM, the body of Randi Lee TRIMBLE was discovered in the garage of her residence at 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, by her husband, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, when, allegedly, he returned home from having dinner with a friend, Jason SHANK, in Lancaster County. An autopsy was performed on the body of the victim on Monday, January 13, 2003 by Dr. Saralee FUNKE, a Forensic Pathologist. She was assisted by Cumberland County Coroner Michael NORRIS. According to Dr. FUNKE, the victim died of multiple stab wounds and strangulation, and the cause of death was homicide. There were at least twenty-seven (27) stabs and cuts on the victim's body, including a deep, gaping gash into the right side, not the front, of the victim's neck, that displayed what appeared to have been outward tearing. Investigators met with Coroner Michael NORRIS and he advised them that, even though the wounds were of different sizes, they could have been made by the same weapon, and the size difference was probably due to movement of the knife, as in slicing while stabbing. He also said that some of the wounds displayed a twisting of the blade. -8- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 While investigators were at the residence of the victim, the computer, located in a room used as a study, was seized and a search warrant was obtained for its contents. Brian TRIMBLE told officers that the computer belonged to him. The computer was submitted to Thomas TARSAVAGE, a computer crime investigator for the Pennsylvania State Police, who advised investigators that he found in the files of the computer a download that he described as "recent," and he turned over a printed copy of this download, entitled, "Hit Man On-Line." This 54-page, on-line article appears to be a condensed version of a book written by a person known as Rex FERAL, and published by PALADIN PRESS. The author calls his work a "technical manual for independent contractors," a euphemism for what is commonly referred to as a hit man, or murderer for hire. In this on-line article the author advises that he prefers a firearm as a weapon of choice, but, if an alternative is necessary, he describes a certain type of knife that he recommends, along with the reason for his choice. He describes this knife as having a six-inch blade, double-edged, and the blade should have a serrated section, for making efficient, quiet kills. The double edge, combined with the serrated section and the six- inch length will ensure a deep, ragged tear, and the wound will be difficult, if not impossible, to close without prompt medical attention. The author advises to "twist the knife before you withdraw (it)." The author then advises, "Movies and ficticious [sic] stories like to show the cutting of the victim's throat as a slice from ear to ear. However, this is not the best, or preferred method. Using your six-inch serrated blade knife, stab deeply into the side of the victim's neck and push the knife forward in a forceful movement. This method will half-decapitate the victim, cutting both his main arteries and windpipe, ensuring immediate death." This part of the instruction is consistent with the wound on the right side of the victim's neck, even though the perpetrator failed to slice the main arteries of the victim. The on-line manual also speaks of staging a burglary, such as investigators believe was done in this case, in order to conceal the true motive for the homicide. There was ransacking throughout the home of the victim, but no indications of a true burglary. The author also advised to wipe fingerprints from everything, including the weapon used. No fingerprints were found in this investigation. The author tells the reader to "drag the body out of the view of windows and doors so that discovery can be delayed." Patterns in the blood in which the victim was found lying, clearly indicate that the victim was dragged about four (4) feet, from one -9- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 area to another. The author of this "manual" offers encouragement to a would-be murderer by telling him that law enforcement, by their own admission, clear little more than twenty (20) percent of reported crimes, and, of those arrested, less than half are convicted. He states "....the American Justice System is so bogged down in technicalities, overcrowded jails, plea bargaining, and a host of other problems that even if charged with a serious crime, we can rest assured that the law is on our side and rarely that of the victim." Pennsylvania Computer Crimes Investigator Thomas TARSAVAGE told investigators on the date of April 16, 2003, that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE sent the internet link to this download, "Hitman On-Line," to the computer of Blaine Mason NORRIS on the date of January 2, 2003, eight (8) days prior to the murder of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's wife, Randi Lee TRIMBLE, and four (4) days prior to a visit by Blaine Mason NORRIS to the residence of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, on January 6, 2003, when Brian Thomas TRIMBLE took off work and stayed at home. Blaine Mason NORRIS was seen by a neighbor leaving Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence in the early afternoon of January 6, 2003, and, when confronted by investigators about this visit, Blaine Mason NORRIS at first tried to deny it happened. During a Grand Jury appearance, for which he was subpoenaed, Blaine Mason NORRIS admitted that he was at Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence on January 6, 2003, saying that this must have been the day they both went to lunch at Taco Bell. Blaine Mason NORRIS told Det. Richard DOUGHERTY that on Friday evening, January 10, 2003, the date of the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE, he was in York having dinner with a friend Michelle CANTY, and that he got there about 7:00 PM. A friend and co-worker of Blaine Mason NORRIS, Ryan BAKER, has told Det. DOUGHERTY that he saw Blaine Mason NORRIS at his apartment on that date, at 7:15 PM, at NORRIS's apartment building. BAKER states that he left NORRIS's building about 7:30 PM, enroute [sic] to Philadelphia, and noticed that Blaine Mason NORRIS was departing in his vehicle at the same time. BAKER knows this because on that date he was going to Philadelphia to visit a friend, and when he left the building in which NORRIS lives, he drove directly to Philadelphia, and phoned the friend, utilizing his cell phone, to let her know he was on his way. When BAKER arrived in Philadelphia, he phoned this friend again in order to make sure her front door was open, as she lives in a bad neighborhood. But the first phone -10- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 call, letting the friend know he was on his way, was made at 8:32 PM, according to Ryan BAKER's cell phone records, and the call to the friend once he arrived in Philadelphia, was made at 10:15 PM. In speaking with Michelle CANTY, with whom Blaine Mason NORRIS was to have dinner on January 10, 2003, investigators learned that NORRIS showed up late at her home. Another friend, who was also supposed to have dinner with CANTY and NORRIS, Jennifer NEJMAN, was also late, arriving about twenty (20) minutes after Blaine Mason NORRIS arrived. Jennifer NEJMAN stated that she arrived at Michelle CANTY's home no earlier than 9:00 PM on January 10, 2003, placing the arrival of Blaine Mason NORRIS in the area of 8:40 PM. Investigators have reason to believe that Randi Lee TRIMBLE was murdered between 7:15 and 8:10 PM on January 10, 2003. On the date of May 8, 2003, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE was scheduled to meet with Chief of Detectives Les FREEHLING, Cumberland County Office of the District Attorney, at 5:00 PM, for an interview. He was accompanied by his mother, Wendy KEESEY, who sat with him during the earlier stages of the interview. When confronted with certain discrepancies in previous interviews with investigators, he finally admitted to Chief FREEHLING, and then also to Det. Richard DOUGHERTY and to your affiant, that he (Brian Thomas TRIMBLE) and Blaine Mason NORRIS planned the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE, and that Blaine Mason NORRIS did the actual killing of Randi Lee TRIMBLE. According to Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, he got home from work at about 4:15 PM on the date of January 10, 2003, and, as was planned and prearranged with Blaine Mason NORRIS, NORRIS arrived on foot at the TRIMBLE residence, 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pa., about 4:30 PM. NORRIS parked his car about two blocks from the residence and walked, wearing clothes similar to those he wore to work that day, and carrying a duffel bag, black in color, with blue and silver trim. NORRIS was let in the TRIMBLE residence by way of the front door. Once inside, Blaine Mason NORRIS took black sweat pants, or jogging-type pants, a black, hooded sweatshirt, or sweat jacket, and black socks from the duffel bag and put them over his street clothes. NORRIS then took latex gloves from this bag and put them on, and then put cloth-type gloves on, over top of the latex gloves. He also had a brown, cloth, cammoflauge [sic] design face scaR, and put this over the lower portion of his face, covering his chin, -11- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 mouth, and nose, similar to a hunting mask. NORRIS then attached a knife in a sheath to one leg and a gun, described by Brian Thomas TRIMBLE as a small caliber, semi-automatic, probably a .22 caliber. Blaine NORRIS then proceeded to ransack the residence, simulating a burglary. The plan between Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS was for Brian Thomas TRIMBLE to leave for a pre-arranged alibi meeting with a friend in Elizabethtown, Pa., and for NORRIS to wait in the residence for the arrival of Randi Lee TRIMBLE. When Randi Lee TRIMBLE arrived, both Blaine Mason NORRIS and Brian Thomas TRIMBLE planned that NORRIS would take a green electrical extension cord from the Christmas decoration, wrap this around the neck of Randi Lee TRIMBLE, and strangle her until she was dead. It was planned between Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE would then come home from his evening with his friend, discover the body of his wife, and then call police. A financial arrangement between Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS was also planned, in which Brian Thomas TRIMBLE would pay Blaine Mason NORRIS a substantial amount of money from the life insurance policy of his wife, Randi Lee TRIMBLE, after TRIMBLE received that settlement. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE would also pay Blaine Mason NORRIS for his expenses incurred while carrying out this conspiracy. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE also related that he and Blaine Mason NORRIS met approximately three (3) weeks after the murder, which occurred on January 10, 2003, and at that time Blaine Mason NORRIS told Brian Thomas TRIMBLE that, when Randi Lee TRIMBLE came home from work and entered the dining room area of the residence, from the garage, where she parked her car, Blaine Mason NORRIS surprised her and attempted to wrap the electrical cord around her neck. He told Brian Thomas TRIMBLE that the victim managed to get a hand between the cord and her neck, thereby preventing complete strangulation, and also that the victim managed to pull down the mask being worn by Blaine Mason NORRIS, and that she did recognize him. Therefore, as Blaine Mason NORRIS told Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, he had to finish the job. Blaine Mason NORRIS told Brian Thomas TRIMBLE that he used his knife and stabbed her until she was dead. He then took off the black outer clothes, placing them in the duffel bag, took the duffel bag and left the TRIMBLE residence. By prearrangement with Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, he also took a diamond ring with a gold band, some other -12- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 jewelry, including a gold heart with small red rubies, and cash. This was meant to confirm that the murder was the result of a burglary gone bad. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE also told investigators that, sometime after the homicide, Blaine Mason NORRIS told him that he incurred $750.00 in expenses, and would like to be reimbursed. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE stated that he paid NORRIS this money, in increments of $200.00 or more, beginning in the latter part of January, 2003. Your affiant believes that certain articles, such as the diamond ring and the jewelry, as well as the duffel bag, knife and sheath, and the face mask, jogging-type pants, hooded sweatshirt and gloves, and the .22 cai semi-automatic handgun may still be hidden at the residence of Blaine Mason NORRIS, or in his vehicle. Additionally, financial records pertaining to the transfer of the previously mentioned money from Brian Thomas TRIMBLE to Blaine Mason NORRIS, such as deposit records, or receipts indicating what the money might have been spent on, should also be found within the NORRIS residence. Your Affiant is requesting that this search warrant be sealed because this continuing investigation is a matter before the Fourth Cumberland County Grand Jury, and this affidavit contains information known only to investigators and the Grand Jury, and disclosure of such investigative information at this time would seriously impair the ability of the Commonwealth to garner truthful testimony from witnesses who will be appearing before the Grand Jury. Defendant maintains that all evidence seized as a result of the execution of this search warrant must be suppressed because: a) the warrant fails to state the apartment number of Defendant's apartment and thus lacks sufficient particularity as to the precise location to be searched; b) by contrast, for example, the April 17, 2003 search warrant specifically states Defendant's apartment number and thus is particular; c) the warrant merely avers that it is a second floor apartment accessible by a steel stair structure; and d) although identified as among the items to be searched for and seized are "Records, journals, diaries, electronic date, photographs, video, digitial [sic] images, letters, audio recordings, written recordings, -13- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 visual depictions, either by hand and/or electronically recorded that describe, or are associated with the murder of Randi Trimble [,]" the affidavit of probable cause fails to mention any of these items, the police never aver why they are seeking them, and the police fail to even aver that they are connected with any criminal activity; e) the warrant is overly broad; f) there was a lack of probable cause/insufficient probable cause to justify the issuance of the aforesaid warrant; g) the affidavit contained stale information inasmuch as there was a four-month span of time between the murder and the search, making it highly unreasonable to expect to find the items sought to be searched for; and h) the police omitted the fact that the day prior to the search, Trimble had informed them that all evidence to be searched for had been destroyed and disposed of, thereby intentionally misleading the court as to the likelihood that the items sought to be searched for in fact would be found. The application for the search warrant sets forth the specific description of the premises to be searched as: a [sic] red brick three story building at the Southeast corner of the intersection of Forester and N. 2® St., Harrisburg City. The building is marked 817. Within this building I request to search an apartment located the second floor accessed from the rear of the building by a steel stair structure, no other apartments on the second floor can be entered in this fashion. The application sets forth "Renter of this apartment, Blaine Mason Norris." Defendant does not maintain that his apartment was not searched or that any other apartment was searched along with his. The requirement for specificity in the place to be searched is to ensure that the wrong place is not searched. See Commonwealth v. Belenky, 777 A.2d 483 (Pa. Super. 2001). By identifying Norris' apartment as being located on the second floor, being accessed from the rear of the building by a steel -14- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 stair structure, with no other apartments on the second floor that can be entered in this fashion, the application sufficiently described the apartment so as to preclude a search of another unit. See In Interest of Wilks, 418 Pa. Super. 73 (1992); Commonwealth v. Kaplan, 234 Pa. Super. 102 (1975). On these facts, not putting the apartment number in the application does not render the warrant invalid. As set forth in the affidavit of probable cause, on May 9, 2003, the police obtained a confession from Brian Thomas Trimble that he conspired with defendant to kill Randi Lee Trimble, and that defendant killed her in her home. Trimble had detailed knowledge as to how this killing was going to be committed and how it occurred. Various items were stolen by defendant from the home during the course of the killing. Trimble told the police that sometime after the homicide, Norris sought $750 from him for expenses which he paid him in increments of $200 beginning the later part of January, 2003. On May 10, 2003, the day after the police obtained the confession, they obtained this search warrant for defendant's home. Although the killing occurred on January 10, 2003, there was probable cause to believe that some evidence of this killing would be in the possession of defendant. In examining the scope of the warrant as to the items to be searched for we are satisfied that it was not overbroad. The items to be seized were the items Trimble described and only such documents and data that may still have been in possession of defendant that was "associated with the murder of Randi Trimble." This was not an open-ended warrant. The warrant clearly limited the material that could be seized in the searches. See Commonwealth v. Bagley, 408 Pa. -15- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 Super. 188 (1991 ). In Commonwealth v. Stamps, 493 Pa. 530 (1981), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania stated: It is well settled that for a search warrant to be constitutionally valid, the issuing authority must decide that probable cause exists at the time of its issuance. This determination must be based on facts described within the four corners of the supporting affidavit, and closely related in time to the date of issuance of the warrant. Otherwise, evidence of criminal activity "... will become so attenuated with the passage of time as to be nonexistent at the time the warrant is applied for and is issued." Courts have been reluctant, however, to set a hard and fast rule as to what constitutes staleness; such a determination must be made on a case by case basis. Mere lapse of time between discovery of criminal activity and issuance of the warrant will not necessarily dissipate probable cause; a showing that the criminal activity is likely to have continued up to the time of issuance of the warrant will render otherwise stale information viable. (Footnotes omitted.) (Citations omitted.) Under the circumstances of this case there was probable cause to believe that evidence of the crime would still be discovered in defendant's apartment. We took testimony on the allegation that the police, in the affidavit of probable cause, omitted that one day prior to the search Trimble informed them that all evidence to be searched for had been destroyed and disposed of, thereby intentionally misleading the court as to the likelihood that the items sought to be searched for in fact would be found. Trimble's detailed eighty-one page confession was made part of the record. Trimble did not inform the police that the evidence to be searched for had been destroyed. While he thought some of it may have been destroyed he did not know. Taking the statement in its entirety, we are satisfied that the police legitimately concluded that -16- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 there was probable cause to believe that the evidence sought to be searched for could still be in defendant's apartment. The probable cause was not stale. III. DEFENDANT'S VEHICLE -- SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED ON MAY 9, 2003 BY JUDGE LAWRENCE F. CLARK, JR. OF THE 12TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT - DAUPHIN COUNTY The affidavit of probable cause for the issuance of this search warrant sets forth: IDENTIFY ITEMS TO BE SEARCHED FOR AND SEIZED: Records, journals, diaries, notes, electronic data, photographs, video, digitial [sic] images, letters, audio recordings, written recordings, visual depictions, either by hand and/or electronically recorded that describe, or are associated with the murder of Randi Trimble. A duffle type bag, black in color, dark or black clothing, including cammoflauge [sic] masks to cover the face, hand gloves of a cloth material and/or hand gloves of a rubber or latex material, a knife and a strap-on knife sheath secured by two straps, a semi-automatic .22 caliber handgun. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES AND/OR PERSON TO BE SEARCHED: 2000 Saturn, black in color, Pa. egistration [sic] ERT-7054 AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: With the exception of the following additional paragraph, the affidavit of probable cause in support of this search of defendant's vehicle is the same as the affidavit of probable cause in support of the warrant signed by Judge Clark on May 9, 2003 for the search of defendant's apartment: PennDOT records were checked and your affiant verified that Blaine Mason Norris is the registered owner of the 2000 Saturn, black in color, Pa. Registration ERT-7054, the vehicle to be searched. Your affiant is -17- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 aware based on his investigative experience that persons who engage in contract killings often use their personal vehicle in the commission of their crimes. In addition, this investigation has revealed that the vehicle to be searched was driven to and from the scene of the crime on January 10, 2003. Defendant maintains that all evidence seized as a result of the execution of this search warrant must be suppressed because: a) although identified as among the items to be searched for and seized are "Records, journals, diaries, electronic date, photographs, video, digitial [sic] images, letters, audio recordings, written recordings, visual depictions, either by hand and/or electronically recorded that describe, or are associated with the murder of Randi Trimble [,]" the affidavit of probable cause fails to mention any of these items, the police never aver why they were are [sic] them, and the police fail to even aver that they are connected with any criminal activity; b) the affidavit, by contrast, does specifically reference certain articles such as jewelry, a duffel bag, knife and sheath, .22 caliber semi- automatic handgun and financial records and made a probable cause connection as to these items; c) however, the police discovered none of the items set forth by the police in the identification of items to be searched for and seized or in the affidavit of probable cause; d) the police did find, for example, a K-Mart register receipt which cannot fairly be said to be among the items set forth by the police in the identification of items to be searched for and seized and nowhere in the affidavit of probable cause were store receipts even mentioned; e) the warrant is overly broad; f) there was a lack of probable cause/insufficient probable cause to justify the issuance of the aforesaid warrant; g) the affidavit contained stale information inasmuch as there was a four-month span of time between the murder and the search, making it highly unreasonable to expect to find the items sought to be searched for; h) the police omitted the fact that the day prior to the search, Trimble had informed them that all evidence to be searched for had been destroyed or disposed of, thereby intentionally misleading the court as to the likelihood that the items sought to be searched for in fact would be found; and i) although the warrant receipt indicates that the warrant was -18- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 executed starting at 9:50 p.m., upon information and belief, the police continued searching for and seizing items from Defendant's car after 10 p.m., making this an illegal and unconstitutional nighttime search which was not authorized by the Court, the police advanced no reasonable cause as to why a nighttime search should be authorized and, in fact, no such reasonable cause existed (e.g., the warrant was issued at 3 p.m. earlier that day about 1 mile from the car and, upon information and belief, the police had possession of the car from shortly after 3 p.m.). The police had probable cause to believe that defendant used his vehicle in coming to and from the scene of the homicide. The analysis that was used to uphold the legality of the May 9th search of defendant's apartment is applicable here to uphold the May 9th search of defendant's vehicle. The documents and data to be seized were limited to that "associated with the murder of Randi Trimble." The seizure of the K-Mart register receipt is an example. As can be gleaned from the affidavit of probable cause for the next warrant we will analyze, issued by Judge Lewis on May 14, 2003, the receipt verified a purchase from K-Mart in Lancaster, on January 9, 2003, the day before the homicide, of clothing similar to that described to investigators by Brian Trimble as having been brought to the Trimble residence on January 10 by Blaine Norris and used by Norris to put over his street clothes in preparation to commit the homicide. The warrant was issued at 3:00 p.m., May 9, 2003. A nighttime search was not authorized. Pa.R. Crim. P. 205 provides: Each search warrant shall be signed by the issuing authority and shall... (5) direct that the warrant be served in the daytime unless otherwise authorized on the warrant, provided that, for purposes of the -19- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 rules of Chapter 200. Part A, the term "daytime" shall be used to mean the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.; Service of the warrant was made at 9:50 p.m. on May 9th. Because service was made before 10:00 p.m., this was not a nighttime search. Commonwealth v. Mazzochetti, 299 Pa. Super. 447 (1982). IV. DEFENDANT'S COMPUTER ASSIGNED TO HIM BY HIS EMPLOYER- SEARCH WARRANT ISSUED ON MAY 14, 2003 BY JUDGE RICHARD A. LEWIS OF THE 12TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT - DAUPHIN COUNTY The affidavit of probable cause for the issuance of this search warrant sets forth: IDENTIFY ITEMS TO BE SEARCHED FOR AND SEIZED: Search for and retrieve, download, view, & analyze information from all computer systems hand held [sic] computers, and associated equipment and peripherals, computer hardware, including central processing units (CPU's), laptops, hard disk-photo disk/drives, floppy disk drives, tape & zip drives/disks, previously seized during this investigation, and currently in the possession of Trooper Thomas TARSAVAGE. CD-ROM/CD-DVD/CD-DVD-R/mini DVD cassettes & drives & disks, thumb drives, external zip drives, and all external storage devices/peripherals, including, digital cameras, and video cameras, all software, video and audio tape/disk storage devices, rewritable CD disks, memory cards, or devices capable of electronic media storage, any and all magnetic, optical or other storage media, CPU's, hardware, computer peripherals, external and internal drives for electronically generated documents, pictures & videos, which may contain information, archival media, computer generated output in printed or electronic form, personal business/financial records information, computer account information and passwords relating to the internet and/or other on-line information services, the history of all web sites visted [sic] and correspondence to and from various site, emails, employment computers, personal computers, laptop computers and Personal information devices which may contain data relating to criminal activity and/or personal financial -20- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 history. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF PREMISESAND/ORPERSONTO BE SEARCHED: Dell computer and "shared drive" assigned to Blain [sic] Mason NORRIS, owned by Capital Blue Cross, 2500 Elmerton Ave., Susquehanna Twp., Dauphin County, Pa., seized on 04-23-03, and presently located at Pennsylvania State Police Department Headquarters, 1800 Elmerton Ave., Susquehanna Twp., Dauphin County, Pa. AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE: On the date of January 10, 2003, at approximately 8:10 PM, the body of Randi Lee TRIMBLE was discovered in the garage of her residence at 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, by her husband, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, when, allegedly, he returned home from having dinner with a friend, Jason SHANK, in Lancaster County. An autopsy was performed on the body of the victim on Monday, January 13, 2003 by Dr. Saralee FUNKE, a Forensic Pathologist. She was assisted by Cumberland County Coroner Michael NORRIS. According to Dr. FUNKE, the victim died of multiple stab wounds and strangulation, and the cause of death was homicide. There were at least twenty-seven (27) stabs and cuts on the victim's body, including a deep, gaping gash into the right side, not the front, of the victim's neck, that displayed what appeared to have been outward tearing. Investigators met with Coroner Michael NORRIS and he advised them that, even though the wounds were of different sizes, they could have been made by the same weapon, and the size difference was probably due to movement of the knife, as in slicing while stabbing. He also said that some of the wounds displayed a twisting of the blade. While investigators were at the residence of the victim, the computer, located in a room used as a study, was seized and a search warrant was obtained for its contents. Brian TRIMBLE told officers that the computer belonged to him. The computer was submitted to Thomas TARSAVAGE, a computer crime investigator for the Pennsylvania State Police, who advised investigators that he found in the files of the computer a -21- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 download that he described as "recent," and he turned over a printed copy of this download, entitled, "Hit Man On-Line." This 54-page, on-line article appears to be a condensed version of a book written by a person known as Rex FERAL, and published by PALADIN PRESS. The author calls his work a "technical manual for independent contractors," a euphemism for what is commonly referred to as a hit man, or murderer for hire. In this on-line article the author advises that he prefers a firearm as a weapon of choice, but, if an alternative is necessary, he describes a certain type of knife that he recommends, along with the reason for his choice. He describes this knife as having a six-inch blade, double-edged, and the blade should have a serrated section, for making efficient, quiet kills. The double edge, combined with the serrated section and the six- inch length will ensure a deep, ragged tear, and the wound will be difficult, if not impossible, to close without prompt medical attention. The author advises to "twist the knife before you withdraw (it)." The author then advises, "Movies and ficticious [sic] stories like to show the cutting of the victim's throat as a slice from ear to ear. However, this is not the best, or preferred method. Using your six-inch serrated blade knife, stab deeply into the side of the victim's neck and push the knife forward in a forceful movement. This method will half-decapitate the victim, cutting both his main arteries and windpipe, ensuring immediate death." This part of the instruction is consistent with the wound on the right side of the victim's neck, even though the perpetrator failed to slice the main arteries of the victim. The on-line manual also speaks of staging a burglary, such as investigators believe was done in this case, in order to conceal the true motive for the homicide. There was ransacking throughout the home of the victim, but no indications of a true burglary. The author also advised to wipe fingerprints from everything, including the weapon used. No fingerprints were found in this investigation. The author tells the reader to "drag the body out of the view of windows and doors so that discovery can be delayed." Patterns in the blood in which the victim was found lying, clearly indicate that the victim was dragged about four (4) feet, from one area to another. The author of this "manual" offers encouragement to a would-be murderer by telling him that law enforcement, by their own admission, clear little more than twenty (20) percent of reported crimes, and, of those arrested, less than half are convicted. He states "....the American Justice System -22- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 is so bogged down in technicalities, overcrowded jails, plea bargaining, and a host of other problems that even if charged with a serious crime, we can rest assured that the law is on our side and rarely that of the victim." Pennsylvania Computer Crimes Investigator Thomas TARSAVAGE told investigators on the date of April 16, 2003, that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE sent the internet link to this download, "Hitman On-Line," to the computer of Blaine Mason NORRIS on the date of January 2, 2003, eight (8) days prior to the murder of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's wife, Randi Lee TRIMBLE, and four (4) days prior to a visit by Blaine Mason NORRIS to the residence of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, 221 Wood Street, East Pennsboro Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, on January 6, 2003, when Brian Thomas TRIMBLE took off work and stayed at home. Blaine Mason NORRIS was seen by a neighbor leaving Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence in the early afternoon of January 6, 2003, and, when confronted by investigators about this visit, Blaine Mason NORRIS at first tried to deny it happened. During a Grand Jury appearance, for which he was subpoenaed, Blaine Mason NORRIS admitted that he was at Brian Thomas TRIMBLE's residence on January 6, 2003, saying that this must have been the day they both went to lunch at Taco Bell. Blaine Mason NORRIS told Det. Richard DOUGHERTY that on Friday evening, January 10, 2003, the date of the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE, he was in York having dinner with a friend Michelle CANTY, and that he got there about 7:00 PM. A friend and co-worker of Blaine Mason NORRIS, Ryan BAKER, has told Det. DOUGHERTY that he saw Blaine Mason NORRIS at his apartment on that date, at 7:15 PM, at NORRIS's apartment building. BAKER states that he left NORRIS's building about 7:30 PM, enroute [sic] to Philadelphia, and noticed that Blaine Mason NORRIS was departing in his vehicle at the same time. BAKER knows this because on that date he was going to Philadelphia to visit a friend, and when he left the building in which NORRIS lives, he drove directly to Philadelphia, and phoned the friend, utilizing his cell phone, to let her know he was on his way. When BAKER arrived in Philadelphia, he phoned this friend again in order to make sure her front door was open, as she lives in a bad neighborhood. But the first phone call, letting the friend know he was on his way, was made at 8:32 PM, according to Ryan BAKER's cell phone records, and the call to the friend once he arrived in Philadelphia, was made at 10:15 PM. Ryan BAKER and Dan BARTASH, who was with Ryan Baker on January -23- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 10, 2003, when both saw Blaine Mason NORRIS at his residence, contacted investigators after midnight on April 24, 2003, and advised investigators that they had been talking and checking records, and now believe that it was between 8:00 PM and 8:15 PM when they saw Blaine Mason NORRIS coming down the stairs of his apartment at 817 N. 2® Street, Apartment 3, Harrisburg, Pa., on January 10, 2003. In coming to this conclusion, they used the times of their cell phone call to Philadelphia, just as they began their trip, as well as their arrival time in Philadelphia as their criteria. In speaking with Michelle CANTY, with whom Blaine Mason NORRIS was to have dinner on January 10, 2003, investigators learned that NORRIS showed up late at her home. Another friend, who was also supposed to have dinner with CANTY and NORRIS, Jennifer NEJMAN, was also late, arriving about twenty (20) minutes after Blaine Mason NORRIS arrived. Jennifer NEJAMN stated that she arrived at Michelle CANTY's home no earlier than 9:00 PM. The time supplied to investigators by Ryan BAKER and Dan BARTASH, after they reconsidered their original story, in which they saw Blaine Mason NORRIS at his residence on January 10, 2003 (8:00 PM to 8:15 PM) would support an arrival in York, Pa. at about 8:40 PM, or later. Investigators have reason to believe that Randi Lee TRIMBLE was murdered between 7:15 and 8:10 on January 10, 2003. On the date of May 8, 2003, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE told Chief of Detectives Les FREEHLING, Detective Richard DOUGHERTY, and Your Affiant, during an interview, that he did, in fact, participate with Blaine Mason NORRIS in the planning and facilitating of the murder of TRIMBLE's wife, Randi Lee TRIMBLE. As part of the conspiracy, Brian Thomas TRIMBLE let Blaine Mason NORRIS into TRIMBLE's home the evening of January 10, 2003. Blaine Mason NORRIS had parked his vehilce [sic] about two blocks from TRIMBLE's residence, wearing clothes similar to those he wore to work that day. He carried a black duffle bag with him. Brian Thomas TRIMBLE let Blaine Mason NORRIS in the front door, at which time Blaine Mason NORRIS removed several pieces of clothing from his duffle bag, including black pants and a dark, hooded sweatshirt, or sweat jacket, which he put on over his street clothes. He also put on a camouflaged face mask over the lower portion of his face. Blaine Mason NORRIS then ransacked portions of the residence, in order to make it appear as a burglary gone bad, and Brian Thomas TRIMBLE opened the kitchen window part way, and moved a settee in the sunroom, to make it appear that a burglar had come in through that window. Brian -24- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 Thomas TRIMBLE then left his residence in order to meet a friend in Elizabethtown, have dinner, visit some friends at the Park City Mall, and then return home. The dinner meeting was designed as an alibi, Blaine Mason NORRIS and TRIMBLE expected TRIMBLE to be the main suspect, after Randi Lee TRIMBLE was killed. Blaine Mason NORRIS remained in the residence, and waited for Randi Lee TRIMBLE to come home from work at which time he strangled her and stabbed her multiple times. There was also an agreement between Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and the Blaine Mason NORRIS in which TRIMBLE would pay Blaine Mason NORRIS for his expenses incurred as a result of the murder, and would then pay him an agreed upon substantial sum of money from an insurance policy settlement that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE expected to receive after his wife's death. According to Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, he has paid Blaine Mason NORRIS the money he owed him as expenses, and he has paid him in increments of $200.00 and more, beginning in the later part of January, 2003. Investigators served a search warrant on the Saturn automobile owned by Blaine Mason NORRIS, and discovered in it a receipt that verified a purchase from K-Mart in Lancaster, on January 9, 2003, the day before the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE, of clothing similar to that described to investigators by Brian Thomas TRIMBLE as having been brought to the residence of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE on January 10, 2003, by Blaine Mason NORRIS, and put on by Blaine Mason NORRIS over his street clothes, prior to, and in preparation of, the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE. This purchase was made by Blaine Mason MORRIS utilizing a credit card. In addition to the previously mentioned link to "Hitman on-line," sent via e- mail from Brian thomas [sic] TRIMBLE to Blaine Mason NORRIS, investigators also know, based on interviews, and based on information from Brian Thomas TRIMBLE, that Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS have communicated with one another utilizing computers, both at their workplace, Capital Blue Cross, and at their homes, and that, since both Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS can be considered computer experts, by the very nature of their jobs, it is reasonable to believe that communication via computer has been a frquent [sic] method of cummunication [sic] between them. Based on all of the above, it is reasonable to believe that both Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason MORRIS have used their computers for the transfer of information and documents that could be considered as -25- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 valuable evidence in this investigation. Additionally, computers are the repository for records and internet access, deleted e-mails, and deleted documents, all of which may be evidence of the collusion of Brian Thomas TRIMBLE and Blaine Mason NORRIS in the murder of Randi Lee TRIMBLE. Investigators also know, by way of a Court-Ordered telephone intercept, that Blaine Mason NORRIS kept his financial records on his computer, inclduing [sic] bank accounts, credit card billing, as well as other financial transactions, and these records will also supply valuable evidentiary evidence in this investigation, based on the previously mentioned credit card purchase of clothing similar to that used on the night of the murder. Therefore, Your Affiant seeks from these computers, and related peripheral items listed and carried on the application cover page and continuation page, documents, internet web sites, e-mails, other types of communications, financial records, and deleted documents and e-mails, notes, memos, or any computer-based information relating to this investigation. Your Affiant requests that this search warrant be sealed because this continuing investigation is a matter before the Fourth Cumberland County Investigating Grand Jury, and this affidavit contains information known only to investigators and the Grand Jury, and disclosure of such investigative information at this time would seriously impair the ability of the Commonwealth to garner truthful testimony from witnesses who will be appearing before the Grand Jury. Defendant maintains that all the evidence seized as a result of this search warrant must be suppressed because: a) the aforesaid computer systems, hand-held computers, etc. were illegally and unconstitutionally searched for and seized from Defendant's apartment on April 17, 2003, as alleged above; b) the aforesaid affidavit of probable cause relied in part on a K- Mart store receipt which was illegally and unconstitutionally searched for and seized from Defendant's car on May 9, 2003, as alleged above; and c) there was a lack of probable cause/insufficient probable cause to justify the issuance of the aforesaid warrant. For the reasons set forth in the analysis of the other search warrants these allegations of an unlawful search and seizure are without merit. -26- CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 AND NOW, this suppress evidence, IS DENIED. ORDER OF COURT day of March, 2004, the motion of defendant to By the Court, Jaime Keating, Esquire M.L. Ebert, Jr., Esquire For the Commonwealth William C. Costopoulos, Esquire For Defendant :sal Edgar B. Bayley, J. -27- COMMONWEALTH BLAINE MASON NORRIS IN RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CP-21 -C R-2091-2003 MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND NOW, this suppress evidence, IS DENIED. BEFORE BAYLEY, J. ORDER OF COURT day of March, 2004, the motion of defendant to By the Court, Jaime Keating, Esquire M.L. Ebert, Jr., Esquire For the Commonwealth William C. Costopoulos, Esquire For Defendant :sal Edgar B. Bayley, J.