United States v. Aguirre
664 F.3d 606
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- DEA surveillance followed Mendoza after a controlled cocaine sale; agents anticipated a later drug deal that evening.
- Officers conducted a knock-and-talk at Mendoza's mobile home; no verbal response and signs of hurried movement inside raised concern of destruction of evidence.
- Officers entered the home without a warrant, detaining Aguirre and others while a warrant was sought two hours later.
- Aguirre's cell phone lay on her bed; it was seized, password-protected, and text messages referencing drug terms were later found.
- District court denied suppression; Aguirre pled guilty to using a communications facility to facilitate a drug-trafficking crime.
- On appeal, Aguirre challenged the warrantless entry and the search/seizure of her cell phone; the Fifth Circuit affirmed denial of suppression.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the entry into the home was justified by exigent circumstances | Aguirre contends warrantless entry tainted evidence | Aguirre argues lack of exigent circumstances or probable cause | Exigent circumstances and probable cause supported entry |
| Whether the cell phone search occurred with a valid warrant | Friday obtained a warrant during detention | Search occurred before warrant issuance | Search conducted under valid warrant and lawful search incident to arrest |
| Whether the warrant was supported by probable cause | Affidavit established nexus between Mendoza's activities and home | Probable cause lacking for warrant | Probable cause supported by the totality of circumstances |
| Whether the warrant properly described items to be seized (particularity) | Cell phone contents were within the warrant's scope by functional equivalence | Cell phones not explicitly listed | Warrant sufficiently particular when read with attachments; cell phone allowed as functional equivalent |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Newman, 472 F.3d 233 (5th Cir. 2006) (reasonable probability of finding drugs supports probable cause)
- Beaumont v. United States, 972 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1992) (nexus between home and drug activity supports probable cause)
- United States v. Gomez-Moreno, 479 F.3d 350 (5th Cir. 2007) (exigent circumstances and knock-and-talk considerations)
- United States v. Wake, 948 F.2d 1422 (5th Cir. 1991) (probable cause standard and Gates framework referenced)
- United States v. Hill, 19 F.3d 984 (5th Cir. 1994) (particularity by describing items by type when feasible)