United States v. Andre Briscoe, 101 F.4th 282

Andre Ricardo Briscoe was involved in a Baltimore-area narcotics conspiracy with multiple co-conspirators.
In May 2015, Briscoe and Kiara Haynes planned to rob and murder Jennifer Jeffrey for her narcotics; Briscoe also killed Jeffrey’s 7-year-old son, fearing he could be a witness.
After the murders, Briscoe was identified through cell phone records; police used a cell site simulator and consent to enter an apartment where he was found.
Briscoe was initially charged via information (due to COVID-19 court disruptions), then indicted for narcotics, firearm offenses, and later for murders and witness killing.
He was convicted on all counts after trial and sentenced to multiple lengthy terms, including life imprisonment for the murders.
Briscoe appealed, arguing five grounds relating to statute of limitations, Fourth Amendment violations, Brady evidence, alleged perjured testimony, and sufficiency of the evidence.

Issue	Briscoe's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Statute of Limitations	Indictment was filed after the 5-year statute expired.	Timely information tolled limit; indictment related back to information.	Filing information tolled statute; indictment timely.
Fourth Amendment (cell site & search)	Cell site simulator, apartment entry, and personal search unconstitutional.	Used warrant/tracking order; valid consent given for entry; lawful sweep.	No violation; warrants & consent justified searches.
Brady Violation (camera evidence)	Gov't failed to investigate/retain potential exculpatory camera evidence.	No duty to seek evidence not in possession; footage was speculative.	No Brady violation; no suppression or favorable evidence.
Perjured Testimony	Gov't relied on witnesses with credibility problems/false statements.	Inconsistencies = credibility, not perjury; no proof testimony was false.	No evidence of knowing use of perjury; claim rejected.
Sufficiency of Evidence	Not enough proof drug was heroin or of interstate commerce nexus.	Circumstantial/lay testimony sufficient; predicate crimes didn't require nexus.	Sufficient evidence for conviction.

Toussie v. United States, 397 U.S. 112 (1970) (statutes of limitations usually begin when the crime is complete)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (Government’s suppression of material evidence violates due process)
Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (1988) (bad faith required when evidence is only potentially useful)
Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (knowing use of false testimony violates due process)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause standard for warrants)
Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (protective sweep exception for searches during arrest)
United States v. Blakeney, 949 F.3d 851 (4th Cir. 2020) (probable cause for search warrant required)
United States v. Dolan, 544 F.2d 1219 (4th Cir. 1976) (lay and circumstantial evidence can establish drug identity)