United States v. Albert White
874 F.3d 490
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- In October 2013 Investigator Brandon Williams received a tip that Albert White was selling marijuana from 196 Turner Lane and conducted a controlled buy using a confidential informant in the driveway of that address.
- The buy was audio/video recorded; Williams observed White in a white truck complete the sale, White drove off, and the recovered marijuana matched the buy money.
- Williams prepared an affidavit recounting the controlled buy, White’s prior narcotics convictions, and that White was "known to have dogs believed to be pit bulls at his residence." A state judge issued a search warrant.
- The search of 196 Turner Lane yielded >1 pound marijuana, a firearm, ammunition, and about $32,000; White was federally indicted and convicted for possession offenses.
- The district court ruled the affidavit lacked probable cause but denied suppression under the Leon good-faith exception; the Sixth Circuit majority affirmed, applying the good-faith exception. Judge Stranch dissented.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (White) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether affidavit established probable cause to search 196 Turner Lane | Affidavit failed to show nexus between interior of residence and drugs; only one driveway sale and no proof the house was White’s | Government conceded probable cause lacking | District court found no probable cause; appeal proceeds on good-faith assumption |
| Whether Leon good-faith exception bars suppression | No: affidavit was so lacking in indicia of probable cause that reliance was unreasonable (bare‑bones) | Yes: affidavit supplied a "minimally sufficient nexus" (controlled buy on premises, prior drug convictions, indicia tying White to the address) | Majority: good-faith exception applies; evidence admissible; dissent: would suppress |
| Whether district court plainly erred by not specifying federal sentence start date | Argues start date should be Feb 25, 2014 to credit custody time | Government: defendant was on writ; state retained primary jurisdiction; BOP sets commencement | No plain error; judge properly left commencement determination to BOP |
| Whether district court erred by not adjusting sentence under U.S.S.G. §5G1.3(b) | Argues prior state confinement relevant conduct required an adjustment | Government: district court permissibly applied §5G1.3(d) to run federal sentence concurrently | No plain error; sentencing treatment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (establishes good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Nathanson v. United States, 290 U.S. 41 (example of "bare-bones" affidavit)
- Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (another prototype of insufficient affidavit)
- United States v. Carpenter, 360 F.3d 591 (en banc) (requires a minimally sufficient nexus between activity and place searched)
- United States v. Jones, 159 F.3d 969 (upholding warrant based on multiple controlled buys including driveway buys)
- United States v. McPhearson, 469 F.3d 518 (affidavit insufficient; good-faith exception not available)
- United States v. Brown, 828 F.3d 375 (affidavit lacking connection between home and trafficking; good-faith exception rejected)
- United States v. Hython, 443 F.3d 480 (single controlled buy may be insufficient to show ongoing trafficking)
- United States v. Van Shutters, 163 F.3d 331 (permitting reasonable inferences from affidavit details)
- United States v. Smith, 783 F.2d 648 (corroborated informant tip plus on-site observation supported probable cause)
- United States v. Frazier, 423 F.3d 526 (informant observation outside home can support search of residence in some circumstances)
- United States v. Berry, 565 F.3d 332 (status as dealer plus activity near home can support nexus inference)