United States v. Cesar Mariscal Felix, 711 F. App'x 259

Oklahoma law enforcement intercepted a semi with ~93 kg of cocaine destined for Lexington; the driver cooperated and arranged a controlled delivery with sham cocaine.
A Lexington pickup met the driver; the pickup driver exchanged the sham cocaine for boxes later found to contain over $1.8 million; agents followed the pickup into a garage attached to a house.
Agents entered the house, found the resident gone, canvassed the area, and later observed Cesar Edgardo Mariscal Felix walking briskly away from a nearby shopping plaza at night wearing light clothing; an officer approached and detained him after inconsistencies in Felix’s account and identification by the cooperating driver.
A subsequent search (pursuant to a warrant obtained after entry) of the house revealed drug paraphernalia, financial documents in Felix’s name, and a Smith & Wesson semiautomatic pistol located in the master bedroom near drug equipment and cash.
Felix pleaded guilty to five drug-related counts without a plea agreement, challenged suppression of evidence allegedly stemming from an illegal warrantless entry and a race-based seizure, and sought a § 3553(f) safety-valve reduction; the district court denied suppression and safety-valve relief, applied a two-level firearm enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), and sentenced him to 126 months after a variance below the Guidelines.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Legality of warrantless entry into the house	Agents had no exigent circumstances or hot pursuit to justify entry; evidence should be suppressed	Entry was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances (risk of destruction of evidence and belief occupants inside)	No plain error: entry was supported by exigent circumstances and reasonable belief occupant would learn police were closing in
Legality of detention at shopping plaza (race-based stop)	Officer stopped Felix solely because he was Hispanic; seizure violated Fourth Amendment	Officer relied on composite description (Hispanic male), time/place (near drug deal), behavior (underdressed, walking away), and evasive answers; race was one factor among others	No error: considering totality, detention was reasonable and not solely race-based
Eligibility for § 3553(f) safety-valve (firearm)	Felix did not possess a firearm in connection with the offense and thus is eligible for safety-valve relief	Firearm was found in master bedroom near drug equipment, cash, and documents in Felix’s name—showing constructive possession	No clear error: Felix failed to prove by a preponderance he did not possess the firearm; safety-valve ineligibility affirmed

United States v. McClain, 444 F.3d 556 (6th Cir. 2006) (warrantless home entry requires probable cause plus exigent circumstances)
United States v. Brown, 449 F.3d 741 (6th Cir. 2006) (reasonable grounds for belief of criminal activity after controlled delivery)
United States v. Sangineto–Miranda, 859 F.2d 1501 (6th Cir. 1988) (exigent-entry test: belief third parties inside and that they may soon realize police presence)
United States v. Yancy, 725 F.3d 596 (6th Cir. 2013) (plain-error review where suppression challenge not preserved)
United States v. Calvetti, 836 F.3d 654 (6th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for preserved Fourth Amendment detention challenges)
United States v. Waldon, 206 F.3d 597 (6th Cir. 2000) (race may be considered as part of a suspect description)
United States v. Haynes, 468 F.3d 422 (6th Cir. 2006) (safety-valve eligibility reviewed for clear error)
United States v. Stewart, 306 F.3d 295 (6th Cir. 2002) (defendant bears burden to prove safety-valve eligibility by preponderance)
United States v. Bolka, 355 F.3d 909 (6th Cir. 2004) (discussing evidentiary standards for § 2D1.1 firearm enhancement versus § 5C1.2 safety-valve)
United States v. Johnson, 344 F.3d 562 (6th Cir. 2003) (finding § 2D1.1 firearm possession can render defendant ineligible for safety-valve)