164 F. Supp. 3d 368
E.D.N.Y2016Background
- Defendant Andre Chandler (aka “Mac Dre”) indicted on drug, firearm, and possession counts; evidence from warrantless Jan 13, 2015 search of his residence and vehicle and pretrial photo identifications and an alleged post-arrest statement are at issue.
- Chandler was on federal supervised release with a condition permitting probation searches when probation has a reasonable belief contraband is present.
- On Jan 13, 2015 U.S. Probation Officers and NYPD searched Chandler’s residence without a warrant and seized multiple firearms, drugs, keys and a cell phone; officers then opened his vehicle with recovered keys and seized additional contraband.
- Government asserts probation learned (via the defendant’s estranged wife and confidential informant) of recent pistol-whipping and gun-brandishing incidents that gave probation reasonable suspicion to search; the record lacks sworn affidavits documenting what probation knew beforehand.
- Two confidential informants separately identified Chandler from a six-photo array as the December 13, 2014 shooter; Chandler challenges the array as suggestive.
- Chandler allegedly said at the precinct “the phone is only WiFi and can’t make calls”; parties dispute whether that was prompted by questioning (i.e., custodial interrogation) or volunteered/booking-related.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of Jan 13, 2015 warrantless search of residence | Govt: Probation officers, enforcing supervised-release condition, had reasonable suspicion based on informant/witness reports to search | Chandler: Record lacks proof probation had reasonable suspicion; search unlawful; alternatively, request hearing | Motion to suppress denied without prejudice; evidentiary hearing granted limited to whether probation had reasonable suspicion to search |
| "Stalking horse" theory (probation used to shield police search) | Govt: Second Circuit rejects stalking-horse suppression defense | Chandler: Argues probation search was used to aid police and evade Fourth Amendment | Rejected as a matter of law in this Circuit; suppression on this basis denied with prejudice |
| Photo-array identifications (due process / suggestiveness) | Govt: Six-photo array contained males fitting description; witnesses knew defendant; identifications reliable | Chandler: Array unduly suggestive because other photos show older men, making Chandler stand out | Court finds record insufficiently developed; grants Wade hearing to examine suggestiveness and procedures |
| Purported statement about phone at precinct (Miranda/interrogation) | Govt: Statement responses to defendant’s request to make a call or a routine booking-type interaction, not interrogation | Chandler: Questioning was designed to elicit incriminating ownership link to recovered vehicle and thus required Miranda warnings | Court finds factual dispute over whether question was interrogation; grants evidentiary hearing on voluntariness/Miranda issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (warrantless home-entry rule and exigency context)
- Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (probation searches may replace probable cause with a lesser standard under supervision interests)
- United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (supervised-release/probation searches require reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Reyes, 283 F.3d 446 (Second Circuit: supervised-release searches and rejection of stalking-horse doctrine)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda warnings required before custodial interrogation)
- Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (Miranda interrogation includes police words or actions reasonably likely to elicit incriminating response)
- United States v. Maldonado-Rivera, 922 F.2d 934 (two-step test for pretrial identification admissibility)
- United States v. Cacace, 796 F.3d 176 (exclusionary rule and fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine)