United States v. Augustine, 742 F.3d 1258

Background

In Nov. 2011 a Saline County drug task force investigated Kevin Ashcraft (a distributor) and, via a wiretap, identified Lisandro Clara‑Fernandez as his supplier. Ping data and surveillance placed Clara‑Fernandez at 904 N. Tenth Street on two occasions.
After observing a transaction, police arrested Ashcraft and Clara‑Fernandez; Ashcraft told officers that Dennis Augustine (904 N. Tenth) was a buyer/recipient of Clara‑Fernandez’s deliveries.
An affidavit for a search warrant for Augustine’s residence recited: Ashcraft’s identification of Augustine, corroboration that Augustine lived at 904 N. Tenth (water service check), surveillance of Clara‑Fernandez at that address, the affiant’s training/experience, and common‑sense assertions that drug dealers keep contraband/records at home.
Officers executed the warrant, found evidence leading to Augustine’s arrest; Augustine moved pretrial to quash the warrant and suppress the search and separately to suppress post‑arrest statements. The district court denied both motions, applying the good‑faith exception to the search and finding Augustine’s Miranda waiver voluntary.
On appeal Augustine challenged the affidavit’s sufficiency and the district court’s reliance on the Leon good‑faith exception; he also argued his post‑arrest waiver was not knowing/voluntary due to drug use and need for prescription medication and raised (for first time) coercion claims. Appellate court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the good‑faith exception permits use of evidence seized under the warrant	Government: affidavit established a minimal nexus and officers reasonably relied on the warrant	Augustine: affidavit lacked indicia of probable cause; reliance was unreasonable (so Leon exception shouldn’t apply)	Court: Affidavit established minimal nexus (informant ID, corroboration, surveillance, affiant expertise); good‑faith exception applies; search evidence admissible
Whether the affidavit was so lacking in probable cause that Leon’s presumption fails	Government: affidavit had corroborated informant statements and factual support	Augustine: affidavit too thin/devoid of factual support to justify magistrate’s issuance	Court: affidavit not devoid of factual support; informant’s statements were corroborated and against penal interest; minimal nexus satisfied
Whether Augustine’s Miranda waiver was knowing and voluntary given alleged intoxication and need for meds	Government: video and officer testimony show Augustine lucid and not under influence; he denied being intoxicated and never said he couldn’t continue without meds	Augustine: his drug use and need for prescriptions impaired his ability to waive rights	Court: Totality of circumstances shows waiver was knowing/voluntary; defendant not substantially impaired
Whether coercion/promises claim may be considered on appeal (raised first time on appeal)	Augustine: asserts coercion and promises rendered waiver involuntary	Government: claim waived because not raised below; Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(e) bar applies	Court: Claim waived for failure to raise in district court; good‑cause exception not met; ineffective assistance review denied on direct appeal

Key Cases Cited

United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule)
United States v. Danhauer, 229 F.3d 1002 (10th Cir. review standards for warrants and good‑faith issues)
United States v. Campbell, 603 F.3d 1218 (10th Cir.: limits on reliance when affidavit is devoid of factual support)
United States v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir.: minimal nexus suffices for good‑faith)
Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (anonymous/identified informant credibility considerations)
United States v. Burson, 531 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir.: drug use alone does not invalidate Miranda waiver; substantial impairment required)
United States v. White, 584 F.3d 935 (10th Cir.: Rule 12(e) waiver consequences for unraised suppression arguments)