A judge ruled Monday that statements made by the man accused of killing NHL star Johnny Gaudreau and his brother, Matthew, can be used at trial, including an admission the man made to police that “I hit (them).”
Lawyers for the accused, Sean M. Higgins, argued that all statements their client made to police should be barred from trial because he was not properly read his Miranda rights against self-incrimination. They also argued that when Higgins mentioned possibly needing a lawyer during questioning the night of the fatal crash, his interview with police should have ended. The prosecution, meanwhile, has said all statements were lawfully obtained.
Higgins, 44, was indicted in December on two counts of first-degree aggravated manslaughter, two counts of second-degree reckless vehicular homicide, one count of tampering with physical evidence (fourth-degree) and leaving the scene of a fatal accident (second-degree).
It’s been over a year since the Gaudreau brothers were struck and killed while riding bicycles near their childhood home on Aug. 29, 2024, the eve of their sister’s wedding. Johnny, a star winger for the Columbus Blue Jackets known to fans as “Johnny Hockey,” was 31. Matthew, who reached the second-tier AHL as a player before pivoting to coaching, was 29. In the 14 months since Higgins’ first hearing, his lawyers have filed a string of unsuccessful motions to dismiss charges and bar evidence against their client from trial.
The latest decision by Superior Court Judge Michael Silvanio comes after a day-long hearing on Oct. 29 that included testimony from four New Jersey State Police officers, body camera footage from some of the officers’ interactions with Higgins on the scene, and an hour-long police interview after Higgins’ arrest. Silvanio rendered his verdict on Monday following closing arguments by the defense and prosecution.
“At this time, I’m ordering that all statements made by the defendant Sean Higgins are, in fact, admissible,” he said.
Defense attorneys argued that New Jersey State Police had already identified Higgins as the driver in the fatal crash and had probable cause to arrest their client before they began questioning him at the scene. According to the defense, Higgins immediately admitted to an arriving trooper, “I hit ’em, I hit ’em, I hit ’em.” Police also spoke to a witness who relayed Higgins’ admission that he had been drinking prior to his arrest.
“At this moment, probable cause for a vehicular homicide offense has been established and Miranda is required,” the defense wrote in a court filing.
Instead, the defense said, police continued to “interrogate” their client and ask Higgins “incriminating questions” about his alcohol consumption. Higgins’ lawyers argued that their clients’ responses — including that he’d been drinking before driving — might not have been elicited had he been advised of his rights. They also challenged that it was clear to Higgins he was not free to leave the scene, meaning he was essentially in custody.
The prosecution countered that the officers’ questions prior to Higgins’ arrest were limited to his involvement in the crash and whether he was intoxicated or not, and “did not amount to custodial interrogation.” And given Higgins was not yet in custody when troopers questioned him at the scene, it was not necessary to advise him of his Miranda rights any sooner. Troopers testified that Higgins was detained, which is more of a temporary stop for an investigation, but not under arrest during that initial questioning.
At the Oct. 29 hearing, New Jersey State Police trooper Mark Allonardo, who was one of the first officers on the scene, testified that he spoke to Higgins generally about the crash — where he was going and in what direction he was driving — at which point he smelled alcohol on his breath. Higgins then admitted to drinking beer that day when asked and failed a field sobriety test. Higgins was then arrested at the scene and read his Miranda rights.
Assistant prosecutor Michael Mestern said the series of events prior to Higgins’ arrest lasted around only 14 minutes and was “typical of many, if not all, traffic accidents police officers encounter daily,” in the State’s counter filing.
Once he was arrested, the state said in the court filing, Higgins “knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily” waived his Fifth Amendment rights “immediately,” and that all statements Higgins made on Aug. 29 and in the early hours of Aug. 30 should be “admissible if this matter proceeds to trial.”
Silvanio said that there was no undue pressure on Higgins to speak with troopers on the scene and said that he “freely and voluntarily” engaged in those conversations. He also cited testimony that while Higgins was told to stay on scene, it was because troopers were actively investigating the fatal accident.
“As viewed on the body worn camera, the court is able to observe the entire time on scene, Mr. Higgins, without any restraint,” Silvanio said. “He’s free to move about … talk on his cell phone, smoke a cigarette.”
The defense also argued that Higgins asked for a lawyer partway through being questioned by police after the crash, and then was asked more questions. According to the body camera footage from the interrogation, Higgins asked if he should obtain a lawyer because he felt uncomfortable with a request by police to review his cellphone.
The troopers said they could not advise him on whether he needed an attorney, then asked if he wished to continue questioning without a lawyer, which Higgins agreed to.
They read Higgins his Miranda rights for a third time, which he waived.
Prosecutors did not consider Higgins’ statement to be an unequivocal request for a lawyer, but rather a request for consultation on whether he wanted a lawyer. The defense argued in an Oct. 29 filing that “once the defendant brought up ‘needing’ an attorney, it triggered his entitlement to counsel and all questioning should have ceased.”
“At the moment the Defendant said, ‘should, should I actually have a lawyer? I don’t know. I feel like I need a lawyer,’ all questioning must cease,” the defense wrote.
Silvanio, in his decision, said Higgins’ question did not rise to an unequivocal request for counsel.
According to the prosecution, Higgins faces up to 70 years in prison if found guilty on all counts. In January, he rejected a plea deal that would see him spend 35 years in prison in return for a guilty plea. Motions to dismiss charges against Higgins were denied by Silvanio in April.
His next court date is scheduled for Dec. 15.