United States v. Glenn Edwards
17-1767
| 3rd Cir. | Nov 30, 2017Background
- Police obtained and executed a warrant to search Edwards’s home on August 16, 2013; the basement search yielded 16 pounds of marijuana, a loaded/stolen Colt .45, and over $16,500 in cash.
- The warrant relied substantially on evidence from three warrantless trash seizures outside Edwards’s home on July 11, July 25, and August 15, 2013.
- Edwards moved to suppress, arguing the trash seizures occurred within the home’s curtilage and thus violated the Fourth Amendment.
- After a suppression hearing, the District Court found the trash pulls were outside the curtilage and denied suppression; the search warrant was executed and evidence was admitted at trial.
- Edwards was convicted on counts including 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking). He moved under Rule 33 for a new trial as to the § 924(c) conviction and also raised ineffective-assistance claims.
- The District Court denied the Rule 33 motion and Edwards appealed; the Third Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Edwards) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Were the warrantless trash seizures protected by the Fourth Amendment because they occurred within the curtilage? | Trash pulls were within curtilage, so police needed a warrant. | Greenwood allows warrantless searches of trash left outside curtilage; District Court found trash was outside curtilage. | Affirmed: factual finding that trash was outside curtilage was supported; no Fourth Amendment violation. |
| Was the search warrant stale such that evidence should be suppressed? | Counsel failed to argue staleness or warrant relied on stale information. | Warrant contained fresh information from trash and a July 19 Dudney interview. | Affirmed: staleness claim lacked merit; counsel did raise it and, in any event, no prejudice. |
| Was there sufficient evidence to convict under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (firearm possession in furtherance of drug trafficking)? | Evidence insufficient to show firearm was possessed to further drug trafficking. | Circumstantial evidence (gun, large cash, 16 lbs marijuana in small basement man-cave) and witness/expert testimony supported inference firearm furthered trafficking. | Affirmed: jury could reasonably find possession in furtherance; Rule 33 denial not an abuse of discretion. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to move for acquittal on § 924(c) or raise staleness effectively? | Counsel deficient for not making motions/arguments; resulting prejudice. | Either counsel was not deficient, or any failure was not prejudicial because motions/arguments were meritless. | Affirmed: record shows counsel raised staleness; even if not, no prejudice because claims lacked merit; failure to move for acquittal likewise not prejudicial. |
Key Cases Cited
- California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (warrant not required to search trash left outside home’s curtilage)
- United States v. Bobb, 471 F.3d 491 (3d Cir.) (possession of firearm requires government show it advanced or promoted criminal activity)
- United States v. Thornton, 327 F.3d 268 (3d Cir.) (addressing reviewability of ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal when record is sufficient)