United States v. Donald Clay, 630 F. App'x 377

Clay and girlfriend Mitchell lived intermittently in an apartment; Mitchell had personal belongings there and reported domestic violence by Clay on the morning of April 23, 2013.
Mitchell told police Clay kept drugs and a gun in a locked closet; officers observed bruises on Mitchell and other corroborating details (van, broken phone) before entering.
Police gained entry with a building maintenance key, conducted a cursory search, saw drug residue and a locked closet, then secured a warrant based on an affidavit recounting Mitchell’s statements and officers’ observations.
Warrant search of the closet produced ~100.87 grams of cocaine, drug paraphernalia, cash, phones, and a loaded .380 handgun in a bag; Clay was charged with drug possession with intent to distribute, felon-in-possession, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)).
District court denied Clay’s motion to suppress (magistrate found Mitchell had apparent authority to consent to initial entry and that the warrant was supported by probable cause); jury convicted on all counts and court imposed a 130-month sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Government)	Defendant's Argument (Clay)	Held
Validity of warrantless initial entry (consent)	Officers reasonably relied on Mitchell’s apparent authority to consent because she lived there, was corroborated by injuries and descriptions, and identified location of drugs/gun	Mitchell lacked authority (no key, not on lease); police should have clarified ambiguities before entry	Affirmed: objectively reasonable for officers to rely on Mitchell’s apparent authority given totality of facts
Validity of search warrant / probable cause for second search	Affidavit (including Mitchell’s statements and officers’ corroboration) gave fair probability of contraband at premises	Initial entry tainted warrant affidavit; Mitchell was effectively an unidentified, unreliable informant so affidavit lacked probable cause	Affirmed: affidavit contained sufficient indicia of reliability and corroboration to support probable cause
Sufficiency of evidence for § 924(c) conviction (possession in furtherance)	Nexus shown: loaded illegal handgun stored adjacent to ~82g of cocaine and other dealer indicia (scales, baggies, phones); weapon strategically located and accessible	No evidence gun was used or removed from bag; zipper on bag reduced accessibility; insufficient nexus to drug trafficking	Affirmed: a rational juror could find gun was strategically located and possessed to further drug trafficking under Mackey factors

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (consent is a Fourth Amendment exception requiring voluntariness analysis)
United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (third‑party consent valid where person has common authority over premises)
Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (apparent authority judged by objective standard; officers may rely on reasonable belief of consent)
United States v. Gillis, 358 F.3d 386 (6th Cir.) (factors showing apparent authority include detailed premises knowledge and corroboration)
United States v. Penney, 576 F.3d 297 (6th Cir.) (cohabitant’s apparent authority upheld despite intermittent residence)
United States v. Waller, 426 F.3d 838 (6th Cir.) (police must clarify ownership when circumstances cast doubt on mutual use)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
United States v. Mackey, 265 F.3d 457 (6th Cir.) (to convict under § 924(c) government must show firearm was possessed to advance/promote drug offense)
United States v. Brown, 732 F.3d 569 (6th Cir.) (Mackey factors applied; weapon location and accessibility relevant to nexus)