State v. Yarbrough, 2014 Minn. LEXIS 2

Background

On May 7, 2012, Yarbrough allegedly threatened a woman in a St. Paul park with a silver handgun, claiming she stole a “large amount” of his crack cocaine, and left in a maroon Chevrolet Caprice with a known license plate.
Police identified Yarbrough’s West 7th Street apartment and observed the maroon Caprice parked behind the building; the vehicle was registered to Yarbrough’s female roommate.
A confidential reliable informant told police Yarbrough was a crack dealer who carried a handgun; Yarbrough had a prior Feb. 14, 2012 arrest for possession with intent to distribute, and the roommate had been present then.
Officers obtained a warrant to search Yarbrough, the vehicle, and the apartment; the warrant authorized searches for firearms, ammunition, papers showing control, and controlled substances.
Execution of the warrant yielded cash, a silver handgun with a black grip (later deemed stolen), ammunition, and drugs; Yarbrough was charged with felony possession of cocaine and marijuana and receipt of stolen property.
The district court suppressed evidence from the apartment for failure to establish a sufficient nexus; the court of appeals reversed as to the handgun and invoked plain view for drugs; the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether affidavit established nexus between alleged crime and residence for firearms	Yarbrough: affidavit lacked a direct connection tying the handgun to the apartment	State: facts (threat with gun, flight in car parked/registered at apartment, roommate driver) support inference firearm would be at residence	Yes — substantial basis to infer handgun/ammunition would be at the apartment; probable cause to search for guns
Whether affidavit established nexus for drug evidence	Yarbrough: affidavit insufficient to show drugs would be at residence (no direct link)	State: informant, prior arrest for intent to distribute, and statement that large amount of crack was stolen support inference Yarbrough was a dealer who would store drugs at home	Yes — three facts (informant statement, prior distribution arrest, stolen large amount) support inference he was a drug wholesaler; probable cause to search for drugs
Whether issuance-of-warrant review requires direct observation at site	Yarbrough: cites Souto for requiring a direct connection	State: nexus may be established by reasonable inferences under Gates/Gail	Court: ‘‘direct connection’’ can be established by inference; totality of circumstances governs
Whether appellate court properly applied plain-view doctrine to admit drug evidence	Yarbrough: plain view not raised below; court of appeals erred to rely on it	State: (alternative justification)	Court: did not decide plain view issue because warrant nexus was sufficient; declined to reach plain-view argument

Key Cases Cited

State v. Souto, 578 N.W.2d 744 (Minn. 1998) (nexus/direct-connection discussion)
State v. Jenkins, 782 N.W.2d 211 (Minn. 2010) (substantial-basis standard for reviewing magistrate’s probable-cause finding)
State v. Harris, 589 N.W.2d 782 (Minn. 1999) (distinguishing dealers from casual users for residence nexus)
State v. Gail, 713 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. 2006) (inferring nexus for weapons based on circumstances)
State v. Pierce, 358 N.W.2d 672 (Minn. 1984) (considering where items are likely kept)
Novak v. State, 349 N.W.2d 830 (Minn. 1984) (drug wholesaler vs. casual user distinction)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances standard for probable cause)
State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 (Minn. 1973) (nexus may be inferred from circumstances)