United States v. Corey Golson
743 F.3d 44
3rd Cir.2014Background
- Postal inspectors intercepted a parcel sent from Phoenix to 237 W. Locust St., Mechanicsburg, PA; initial inspection found ~20 lbs of marijuana after a warrant to open the parcel was obtained.
- Inspectors replaced the contraband with a small representative sample and inert material, placed GPS/indicator equipment in the parcel, and planned a controlled delivery.
- A Pennsylvania state trooper obtained an anticipatory search warrant from a Magisterial District Judge (MDJ Martin) authorizing a search of the residence upon successful controlled delivery and an indicator alert.
- An under-cover postal inspector delivered the reconstructed parcel; a resident (CJG) signed for it as "Derek Brown" and took it inside. The indicator alerted and state and federal officers executed the anticipatory warrant, seizing firearms, large quantities of heroin, and other drug-distribution items.
- Golson moved to suppress, arguing (1) the anticipatory warrant violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(b) because the issuing MDJ is not a judge of a state court of record and (2) the four-day retention of the parcel before opening violated the Fourth Amendment. The district court denied suppression; Golson appealed after pleading guilty conditionally.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Golson) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(b) to the anticipatory warrant | Warrant invalid because MDJ Martin is not a federal judge or a judge of a state court of record as Rule 41(b) requires | Warrant was issued under state law for a state-character investigation, so Rule 41(b) does not apply | The search was "state in character" under Bedford factors; Rule 41(b) inapplicable and MDJ status is moot — affirmed |
| Probable cause for anticipatory warrant given omissions in affidavit (replacement of 20 lbs) | Affidavit omitted that the parcel had been reconstructed with only trace contraband, undermining probable cause | Even when omitted facts are supplied, affidavit provided a substantial basis for a fair probability that evidence would be found; triggering condition (delivery + indicator) was sufficiently probable | Probable cause existed; omission did not invalidate the warrant; anticipatory warrant met Grubbs prerequisites — affirmed |
| Sufficiency / specificity of the triggering condition for anticipatory warrant | Triggering condition insufficiently specific to warrant anticipatory search (challenge to nexus and likelihood) | Affidavit showed nexus (experience that distribution sites contain other contraband) and a fair probability the device would be opened after delivery | Triggering condition (successful controlled delivery + audible indicator) satisfied Grubbs requirements — affirmed |
| Four-day warrantless detention of parcel before opening | Four-day retention was an unreasonable seizure and requires suppression | Detention was based on reasonable suspicion, delay attributable to investigation, weekend, and officer leave; short detention permissible | Four-day detention was reasonable under totality of circumstances (Van Leeuwen and circuit authority) — affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bedford, 519 F.2d 650 (3d Cir. 1975) (factors for determining whether a search is "state" or "federal" in character)
- Grubbs v. United States, 547 U.S. 90 (2006) (standards for anticipatory warrants and triggering conditions)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause review and the "totality of the circumstances" test)
- California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991) (warrant requirement as a Fourth Amendment baseline)
- United States v. Yusuf, 461 F.3d 374 (3d Cir. 2006) (treatment of omissions in warrant affidavits)
- United States v. Stearn, 598 F.3d 540 (3d Cir. 2010) (supporting precedent on anticipatory warrant nexus and standing issues)
- United States v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249 (1970) (permitting temporary detention of mail based on reasonable suspicion)