United States v. Donald Hollin
459 F. App'x 535
6th Cir.2012Background
- Hollin was convicted in the Western District of Michigan on multiple drug offenses following an investigation into Arthur Anderson's trafficking.
- Officers observed Anderson with Hollin at an apartment in Wyoming, Michigan, and later found heroin in Anderson's car after a traffic stop and dog sniff.
- Redd, a resident of the apartment, told officers Hollin had a key and had stored a box there, prompting consent to search the apartment and a walk-through that uncovered marijuana roaches.
- A warrant affidavit relied in part on Redd’s statements and generic drug-trafficking indicators to justify search of the apartment for drugs, weapons, and records.
- The search yielded 1,532 grams of heroin, a blender box, bags, gloves, a scale, and marijuana roaches; various documents were also seized.
- At trial, fingerprint evidence from multiple items was admitted; Hollin challenged the cross-examination of a fingerprint expert; the jury found Hollin guilty on several counts and he was sentenced to life imprisonment on two counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the good-faith exception applies to the search | Hollin argues the affidavit was bare bones and the warrant flawed. | Hollin contends the warrant lacked probable cause and the good-faith exception should not apply. | Good faith applies; suppression not required. |
| Whether the search warrant supported probable cause | Affidavit omitted key details, rendering probable cause lacking. | Marijuana roaches provided probable cause to search for contraband. | Probable cause supported by marijuana roaches and related statements. |
| Whether cross-examination of fingerprint witness violated Confrontation Clause | Cross-examination limitations unfairly restricted defense testimony. | Limitations were proper and harmless given the record. | Harmless error; no Confrontation Clause violation. |
| Whether life sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) is constitutional | Challenge to constitutionality of mandatory life term. | Statute is constitutional and properly applied. | Statute upheld; life sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Thomas, 605 F.3d 300 (6th Cir. 2010) (good-faith exception scope and exceptions)
- United States v. Hodson, 543 F.3d 286 (6th Cir. 2008) (subjective officer knowledge not enough for bad faith)
- Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (U.S. 2004) (invalid warrant cannot be salvaged by officer reliance)
- Delaware v. Van Arsdell, 475 U.S. 673 (1986) (harmless error and aggravating factors in confrontation cases)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1996) (subjective intent of officer irrelevant to probable cause)