United States v. Dugan
450 F. App'x 633
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Dugan was convicted of illegal marijuana use, production, and distribution; the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The government’s Speedy Trial Act claim was not preserved because no pretrial motion to dismiss was filed.
- A warrantless search of Dugan’s home was challenged as Fourth Amendment violation.
- The district court admitted incriminating statements; Miranda issues were addressed but deemed harmless error.
- Evidence showed at least 100 marijuana plants with roots; multiple officers and an expert identified the plants as marijuana.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speedy Trial Act waiver and preservation | Dugan | Dugan | Waived; no pretrial motion to dismiss |
| Validity of warrantless home search | Ewing emergency and exigent circumstances | Fourth Amendment violation | Search upheld under emergency doctrine and exigent circumstances |
| Miranda warning and admissibility | Miranda claims admitted; challenged evidence | Statements should have been suppressed | Harmless error; admitted statements not affecting outcome |
| Sufficiency of evidence for 100+ plants | Evidence showed 100+ plants with roots | Insufficient plant count and identification | Sufficient evidence; 100 plants established manufacturing |
| Ex post facto challenges to CSA application | Raich affects application | Constitutional violation | No ex post facto problem; acts occurred before Raich decision |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Alvarez-Perez, 629 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir. 2010) (review of Speedy Trial Act standards; de novo/factual standards for §3161)
- United States v. Hall, 181 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 1999) (preservation of Speedy Trial Act claim when defendant moves to dismiss)
- United States v. Ewing, 638 F.3d 1226 (9th Cir. 2011) (Fourth Amendment search review; de novo)
- Huff v. City of Burbank, 632 F.3d 539 (9th Cir. 2011) (exigency to prevent destruction of evidence)
- United States v. Washington, 462 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2006) (Miranda-related standards; voluntariness)
- United States v. Gillam, 167 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 1999) (harmless error standard for admissible evidence)
- United States v. Tucker, 641 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2011) (sufficiency of evidence for plant counts)
- United States v. Purdy, 264 F.3d 809 (9th Cir. 2001) (definition of unlawful user under § 922(g)(3))
- Raich v. Ashcroft, 352 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2003) (ex post facto discussion; Raich later reversed in part by Gonzalez v. Raich)
- Gonzalez v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (S. Ct. 2005) (Supreme Court decision on medical marijuana law)
- United States v. Reynard, 473 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2007) (ex post facto challenge standards)
- United States v. Ruiz, 428 F.3d 877 (9th Cir. 2005) (affirming alternative bases for denial of suppression)