97 F.4th 1139
8th Cir.2024Background
- Darion Thomas was arrested at a hospital in Iowa where he was with his child and the child’s mother, Tyliyah Parrow, based on outstanding warrants.
- Law enforcement witnessed Thomas and Parrow with a child’s backpack and a cell phone, both items becoming subjects of search and seizure.
- Parrow, identified as the owner of the backpack, was asked multiple times and gave verbal consent to its search; during the search, officers found methamphetamine and marijuana.
- Parrow initially agreed to provide her cell phone for a download but later apparently revoked that consent; police retained the phone and obtained a search warrant five days later, accounting for a federal holiday in that period.
- Thomas moved to suppress evidence from both searches (the backpack and the phone) and challenged a two-level sentence enhancement for supervising a minor in drug dealings; the district court denied the motions, and Thomas appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Thomas's Argument | Gov't Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntariness of backpack search | Parrow’s consent was involuntary due to a coercive environment | Consent was voluntary, with multiple confirmations | Search was voluntary; consent was valid |
| Reasonableness of 5-day delay for phone warrant | Seizure duration was unreasonable; evidence should be suppressed | Delay justified by holiday and other circumstances | Delay was reasonable; no Fourth Amendment violation |
| Standing to contest phone seizure | Thomas had privacy expectation due to use of the phone | Phone belonged to Parrow; questionable standing | Thomas lacked clear standing |
| Two-level role enhancement at sentencing | No basis for enhancement; buyer-seller relationship only | Evidence, including texts, showed supervision of a minor | Enhancement upheld; district court not in error |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jackson, 811 F.3d 1049 (8th Cir. 2016) (sets standard for reviewing suppression motions: factual findings for clear error, legal conclusions de novo)
- United States v. Chaidez, 906 F.2d 377 (8th Cir. 1990) (discusses totality of circumstances test for voluntariness of consent)
- United States v. Bearden, 780 F.3d 887 (8th Cir. 2015) (lists factors relevant to voluntary consent)
- United States v. Barragan, 379 F.3d 524 (8th Cir. 2004) (addresses standing to raise Fourth Amendment claims based on expectation of privacy)
- United States v. Johns, 469 U.S. 478 (1985) (discusses duration of property seizure and Fourth Amendment reasonableness)
- United States v. Cosey, 602 F.3d 943 (8th Cir. 2010) (sets standard for reviewing sentencing role enhancements for clear error)