971 F.3d 22
1st Cir.2020Background
- Dec. 2014 traffic stop of Adams in a rental car; officers arrested him for driving without a license, found ~$500 in small bills, conducted two canine sniffs that alerted, and seized five cellphones, a backpack, a cut-corner plastic bag ("Dominican tie"), and loose screws.
- One month later MDEA obtained warrants to search the five phones; two months after the stop Connecticut police searched an apartment rented by Adams's and found large quantities of heroin and cocaine.
- 2016: agents arranged controlled buys, obtained arrest warrants, located Adams and an associate in a Saco hotel, obtained a no-knock warrant, observed Adams retrieve a black bag from a blue Volkswagen, and found large quantities of drugs and cash in the hotel room and in the bag.
- Volkswagen search produced paperwork for a storage locker; surveillance showed the associate accessing the locker; a canine sniff of the locker alerted; a warrant for the locker search produced firearms and additional drugs.
- Superseding federal indictment charged Adams with drug conspiracy (count 1) and felon-in-possession (count 4). Adams entered a conditional guilty plea reserving appeal of two specified suppression orders; district court denied suppression motions and later denied his motion to withdraw the plea; he was sentenced to 300 months.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of challenging 2014 traffic stop | Gov't: Adams waived challenges by conditional plea (only preserved two suppression orders) | Adams: stop and ensuing searches were unlawful | Waived — conditional plea did not reserve traffic-stop claims; arguments forfeited |
| Probable cause for cellphone warrants | Gov't: dog alerts, $500 in small bills, packaging materials, screws, multiple phones, agent experience, and prior similar arrests supported fair probability phones contained evidence | Adams: agent's statement about being "observed at known drug locations" lacked factual support; one-month lapse made affidavit stale | Probable cause upheld — even excising disputed statement affidavit provided ample circumstantial and corroborated evidence; one-month delay not fatal |
| Probable cause for Connecticut apartment warrant | Gov't: surveillance, a suspect's retrieval of a gun weeks earlier, Miliner's presence leaving Apartment #3 with drugs, property manager identifying "Eric Adams" as tenant, stash-house inference | Adams: Miliner did not explicitly say drugs came from apt; earlier gun-retrieval info stale | Probable cause upheld — totality of facts supported stash-house inference and a warrant to search Apartment #3 |
| No-knock provision and storage-locker warrant | Gov't: arrest warrants, cell-site and surveillance placing Adams at hotel, informant-controlled buys, informant reports, observed retrieval of bag, VW paperwork linking locker, video of associate accessing locker, positive canine sniff | Adams: affidavit used boilerplate about traffickers being armed; Franks-type falsity claim and insufficient nexus to Adams for locker | No-knock and storage-locker warrants upheld — affidavit supported no-knock (danger/destruction risk) and locker probable cause; Franks claim not timely raised (no Franks hearing requested) |
| Motion to reconsider and plea-withdrawal | Gov't: defendant had time and opportunity, plea was knowing and voluntary; new arguments in reconsideration improper | Adams: late discovery and short time to consider plea, family pressure and risk of life sentence made plea involuntary; sought reconsideration with new arguments | Motion to reconsider: denied as raising arguments that should have been made earlier; Plea withdrawal: denied — district court did not abuse discretion; plea found knowing, voluntary, and supported by court colloquy |
Key Cases Cited
- Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (2013) (dog alerts can establish probable cause under totality of circumstances)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause assessed under the totality of the circumstances)
- Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925) (automobile exception to the warrant requirement)
- United States v. Banks, 540 U.S. 31 (2003) (standards for no‑knock entries and knock‑and‑announce exceptions)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (standard for challenging truthfulness of affidavit and entitlement to a hearing)
- Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171 (1987) (courts may consider the corroboration of hearsay within an affidavit)
- United States v. Almonte‑Báez, 857 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2017) (appellate review: clear‑error for facts, de novo for probable cause)
- United States v. Tanguay, 811 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2016) (affirming suppression denials supported by any objectively reasonable view of the evidence)