The Case Against Robert Keith Miller: Stolen Property, a Contempt Order, and Allegations Involving Dakota and Cheyenne Miller

Local businessman says the fired Sheriff’s sergeant still holds items seized in a 2016 arrest that was later dismissed

MOBILE, Ala. — The case against Robert Keith Miller is not complicated. According to the victim and his family, Miller—then a sergeant with the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office—was the lead investigator who seized dozens of items from a local businessman’s home in 2016 and then allegedly stole much of what was taken. The victim says Miller took computers, clothing, business equipment, cash, and electronics, failed to place many of the items into the court-ordered inventory, and eventually directed the property to his own children: Dakota Miller and Cheyenne Miller.

The victim’s allegations have persisted for years, and they have been strengthened, in his view, by a Mobile County Circuit Court contempt order, by Miller’s later appointment as Chickasaw police chief, and by his abrupt firing from that job.

The victim has said from the beginning that the property was never fully returned. He says the Sheriff’s Office ignored court orders, returned only part of what was taken, and treated the rest as if it belonged to the officers who seized it. At the center of that accusation is Miller.

The 2016 Seizure

The victim was arrested on July 13, 2016, on allegations that he impersonated a peace officer. Court records show he faced 20 felony counts of impersonating a peace officer and 20 felony counts of second-degree possession of a forged instrument. Investigators claimed he issued fake parking tickets and forced victims to send checks to a P.O. Box. At the time, the victim was running unopposed as a constable.

The victim has always maintained that the State’s theory was false. He says Constable Dale Dorsey testified that the victim was in fact his deputy and a sworn law enforcement officer. The victim describes the prosecution as part of a wider conflict between the Sheriff’s Office and Mobile County’s elected constables—a conflict that, in his account, led to his arrest and to the aggressive seizure of his personal and business property.

When he was arrested, the victim says, deputies took dozens of items from his home. According to search warrant returns and court records, Mobile County sheriff’s personnel seized items from the victim’s home and motor vehicle. The victim says the property was never fully returned, even after the court ordered its return more than once.

The Contempt Order

According to the victim, the court had earlier ordered the Sheriff’s Office to return an iPad, iPhone, and many other items worth thousands of dollars. The victim says the Sheriff’s Office returned some other items on that order but not the iPad or the valuables. He initially chose not to seek contempt and instead “continued to be lenient.” On Tuesday, September 25, 2018—one day after the court’s deadline to return the property—the victim says he went to the Sheriff’s Office property division with a copy of the order and was again refused.

A motion for contempt followed. As the victim described it, the motion asked the court to require reimbursement of his attorney’s fees and costs and to award interest and compensation for loss of use of the property, including business losses he attributes to the seizure.

The motion was heard on Thursday, October 4, 2018. On Friday, October 5, 2018, at 10:23 a.m., the court’s electronic filing system issued a Notice of Order. The victim’s attorney, Ryan T. Northrup, forwarded that notice with the description “Judge Youngpeter’s Order granting our Motion for Contempt.”

Judge Michael Youngpeter found the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office in contempt for not returning property seized by the department in 2016. The judge granted the victim’s motion and ordered the Sheriff to return his property or be fined $100 per day after Friday, October 5. Captain Paul Burch with the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that the victim was allowed to pick up his remaining property on Thursday, October 11. Burch also said the victim was alleging that some of the property seized was not returned.

The victim told reporters at the time that the court held the Sheriff’s Office and the Mobile County District Attorney’s Office in contempt for disobeying its orders. He said the judge ordered the Sheriff’s Office to pay $100 per day for each day his property was unlawfully held, and he estimated that, counting from the 2016 seizure, the total could approach $100,000.

“I am glad that the court agreed with what we have been saying for years,” the victim said in a statement. “The Mobile County Sheriff’s Office operates without any regard for law or court orders, and seems to think that it is above the law.”

The contempt finding extended beyond the Sheriff’s Office. According to local reporting, a Mobile County Circuit Court judge held the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office and Mobile County District Attorney’s office prosecutor Shelley Pope Corley in contempt of court for disobeying court orders in the case they filed against the victim. Corley, who publicly maligned the victim and all constables in open court, was later dismissed by the Mobile County District Attorney’s office in July.

The Allegations Against Sergeant Robert Keith Miller

The victim and his family allege that deputies did more than withhold property. They say officers took computers, clothing, business equipment, and thousands of dollars in cash and electronics from the home. Much of it, they say, was never entered into the inventory filed with the court. Some of it, they allege, ended up in the personal possession of officers.

In the years since the contempt order, the victim’s allegations have focused increasingly on one specific officer: Sergeant Robert Keith Miller of the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office. According to the victim and his family, Miller was the lead investigator on the case and was allegedly involved in the theft of items seized from the home. They allege that Miller took computers, clothing, business equipment, and other valuables and distributed them to his son, Dakota Miller, and his daughter, Maggie Cheyenne Garland.

The victim says he has documented the items he contends were ordered returned but never were, and he hopes to use the court record to establish where the missing property is. He has also said he would like to question Sheriff’s Office personnel under oath about what happened in 2016. According to a transcript from a 2019 court hearing, the victim testified in court that Maggie Cheyenne Garland was a student at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. He received a ping from his stolen iPhone in the same area. The Mobile County District Attorney’s office disputed that allegation, stating that it may have been one of the victim’s “friends” with the phone. 

The allegations against Miller gained additional significance when he was appointed police chief in the city of Chickasaw, Alabama, a small municipality in Mobile County. Miller served as Police Chief and Public Safety Director for the city, a role that placed him in a position of public trust despite the unresolved allegations in the victim’s case.

Miller’s Tenure as Chickasaw Police Chief and His Firing

Miller’s tenure as Chickasaw’s police chief was short and controversial. He was placed on administrative leave on Monday, July 10, 2023, by Mayor Barry Broadhead, who notified him of his intent to terminate him, according to Chickasaw City Attorney Nash Campbell. Miller previously told WKRG he was given no notice about possible conduct issues and said this was unexpected.

On Tuesday night, July 11, 2023, the Chickasaw City Council voted 4 to 1 to terminate Miller. Chickasaw City Councilman Kendall Sterrett was the lone dissenting vote. Council members went into executive session for almost three hours at Tuesday night’s city council meeting to discuss the personnel matter.

Mayor Broadhead declined to comment on the specific reasons for Miller’s firing, stating that what was discussed in executive session related to the hearing is confidential. “There won’t be any statement other than what we revealed in the motion before the council,” Mayor Broadhead said. Captain Tommie McDuffie was named acting chief at the time.

The reason behind Miller’s firing has never been publicly released. At the time, Miller said Buzz Jordan would be representing him. WKRG contacted Jordan, who said the reason for Miller’s termination was still unknown.

The Lawsuit and Aftermath

In February 2024, Miller filed a lawsuit against the City of Chickasaw and Mayor Barry Broadhead in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. The case, Miller v. City of Chickasaw, Alabama et al, was filed as a civil rights employment discrimination suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

In court documents, Miller claims that his employment contract was breached when the city and mayor ignored terms and terminated him without cause. Miller, who says there was no due process in his firing, previously told WKRG that he was given no notice about possible conduct issues. He now seeks an undisclosed amount related to lost wages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and other relief.

According to court records, Miller was not successful in the lawsuit and did not obtain a judgment against the city.

The Broader Implications

The case has become emblematic of broader concerns about accountability within Mobile County’s law enforcement and criminal justice institutions. The fact that a sitting police chief—who had been accused in a civil proceeding of involvement in the disappearance of seized property—was able to serve in a position of public trust has raised questions about how thoroughly allegations against officers are investigated before they are promoted or hired by other agencies.

For the victim, the quest for his missing property continues. He says he has documented the items he contends were ordered returned but never were, and he hopes to use the court record to establish where the missing property is. He has also said he would like to question Sheriff’s Office personnel under oath about what happened in 2016.

The Mobile County Sheriff’s Office has maintained that it has complied with all court orders, and no court has found that the office or any of its personnel stole property. However, the contempt order and the allegations against Miller have kept the case in the public eye, and the victim’s persistence suggests that the dispute is far from over.

As the victim put it in his statement following the contempt order: “The Mobile County Sheriff’s Office operates without any regard for law or court orders, and seems to think that it is above the law.” Whether the courts will ultimately agree remains to be seen, but the case has already exposed fractures in the relationship between the Sheriff’s Office, the constables, and the citizens they serve.