United States v. Figueroa-Cruz
914 F. Supp. 2d 1250
N.D. Ala.2012Background
- Figueroa-Cruz moves to suppress GPS-tracker evidence and related seized contraband arising from a drug investigation in the Northern District of Alabama.
- GPS device attached to a green Jetta in Hoover/Homewood, Alabama on Sept. 20, 2011, without a warrant or interim warrant.
- Agent surveillance linked the Jetta to a Texas-based drug organization; several occupants and vehicles (Lexus, Jetta, gray Nissan) played roles in the drug trafficking scheme.
- On Oct. 4–5, 2011, agents observed activity at Walmart and a Howard Johnson, leading to observed purchases of bulk sealing supplies and the defendant’s appearance with the Jetta and Lexus, and the later seizure at Skyline Drive.
- Agents entered the Skyline Drive residence without a warrant after securing the scene; cocaine and currency were found, and the defendant was arrested. Suppression is challenged under Fourth Amendment trespass, Jones, and related good-faith/attenuation theories.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did GPS attachment/search violate Fourth Amendment? (trespass) | Figueroa-Cruz asserts trespass/right to privacy in vehicle use warrants suppression. | Government relied on Jones to permit warrantless GPS tracking absent exclusive driver ownership or bailment. | No suppression; no cognizable bailment/ownership shown; GPS trespass insufficient absent expectancy. |
| Does evidence derived from GPS taint require suppression under attenuation/good-faith? | Evidence after GPS attachment is fruit of violation and should be suppressed. | Attenuation and good-faith reliance on precedent justify admissibility. | Evidence attenuated; good-faith reliance defeats suppression. |
| Was the Skyline Drive entry a valid exigent-curcumstance warrantless entry? | Entering without a warrant violated Payton and required suppression. | Exigent circumstances and securing the scene justified warrantless entry. | Warrantless entry permissible; probable cause and exigent circumstances existed; suppression denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) (GPS attachment to a vehicle is a search when there is a property interest)
- Santa v. United States, 236 F.3d 662 (11th Cir. 2000) (exigent circumstances in narcotics investigations; warrantless entry considerations)
- United States v. Tobin, 923 F.2d 1506 (11th Cir. 1991) (exigent circumstances and hot pursuit considerations in narcotics cases)
- United States v. Michael, 645 F.2d 252 (5th Cir. 1981) (beeper tracking device; public-travel usage; no fourth amendment violation)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009) (good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule; deterrence costs)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (2011) (binding appellate precedent; good-faith reliance; exclusionary rule limits)