United States v. Ebon P.D. Brown
765 F.3d 278
| 3rd Cir. | 2014Background
- Brown was stopped by four plainclothes Pittsburgh detectives after they observed the Impala parked illegally and Brown’s furtive movements suggesting concealment of a firearm
- Detectives observed a firearm’s grip under the driver’s seat and Brown was seized, arrested for unlawful firearm possession as a felon
- Brown moved to suppress the firearm; the District Court denied the motion and Brown was tried
- Brown’s girlfriend McCoy testified that she had purchased the gun for personal protection in 2009 and that she left it under the seat
- The Government sought to introduce Rule 404(b) evidence that Brown had used straw purchasers to obtain firearms in 2005; the District Court allowed only a stipulation
- Brown was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and later appealed claiming suppression error, improper 404(b) evidence, and improper closing arguments; the Third Circuit vacated and remanded for a new trial
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| suppression of firearm evidence | Brown contends the stop/search violated Fourth Amendment | Brown argues the seizure was unlawful and the search invalid | Affirmed denial of suppression; no Fourth Amendment violation at suppression stage |
| Rule 404(b) admissibility of straw purchaser evidence | Brown argues prior straw purchaser evidence is improper propensity evidence | Government contends the evidence shows knowledge of firearm presence | Erroneous admission; not harmless; reversed and remanded for new trial |
| prosecutor’s closing arguments | Brown argues remarks improper and prejudicial | Government argues remarks were permissible common-sense analogy | Not harmless; jury instructions not sufficient to cure; remand for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 389 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable suspicion and stop-and-frisk framework)
- Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (high-crime area supports reasonable suspicion for Terry stop)
- Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (limits vehicle searches incident to arrest)
- Ubiles, 224 F.3d 213 (2000) (gun observation can support reasonable suspicion in some contexts)
- Sampson, 980 F.2d 883 (1992) (non-propensity purpose must be clearly connected to elements of the offense)