880 F.3d 713
5th Cir.2018Background
- Williams was on state probation with a condition allowing searches by his probation officer with or without a warrant when the officer had reasonable suspicion.
- DEA and NOPD informed probation officer Patrick Green that Williams was allegedly trafficking large quantities of heroin; Green decided to perform a compliance check.
- At Williams’s car dealership, Green observed large bulges in Williams’s clothing, Mirandized him, conducted a protective frisk, and removed wads of cash totaling about $10,000 from Williams’s person.
- A drug-detection canine alerted to the cash; Williams gave inconsistent explanations about the money and named a known drug dealer as the source.
- Officers obtained consent to search the dealership, Williams’s mother’s home (an address tied to his business), and Williams’s residence; Williams later volunteered that he had a gun and money at home.
- Searches of Williams’s residence yielded approximately $425,000 in cash and a .40 caliber pistol; Williams was federally indicted, moved to suppress, lost below, pled guilty while preserving suppression appeal, and appealed the denials.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of protective frisk at dealership | Williams: frisk was unlawful; no officer-safety basis | Government: visible bulges, probation status, tip supported Terry frisk | Frisk was lawful — visible bulges plus context justified a protective pat-down |
| Probable cause/reasonable suspicion to search dealership | Williams: subsequent searches tainted if frisk unlawful | Government: frisk produced $10,000 and K-9 alert, plus inconsistent statements — gave reasonable suspicion | Court: independent reasonable suspicion existed to search dealership |
| Validity of searches of mother's house and Sandalwood residence | Williams: searches unlawful and not justified by reasonable suspicion | Government: ties to business address, prior arrest at location, K-9 alerts, and Williams’s volunteered admission about gun and money | Court: searches lawful — reasonable suspicion and voluntary consent/admission supported searches |
| Applicability of probation search exception | Williams: Fourth Amendment protections apply; searches exceeded scope | Government: probation condition, Griffin and related precedent allow searches on reasonable suspicion and tips from police | Court: probationer’s reduced privacy and Griffin permit searches based on law enforcement tips and officer experience; denials of suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Zuniga, 860 F.3d 276 (5th Cir. 2017) (standard of review and evidentiary posture for suppression rulings)
- United States v. Robinson, 741 F.3d 588 (5th Cir. 2014) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings)
- Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987) (probation searches may be based on police tips and probation officer's experience)
- United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (2001) (probation conditions can justify searches that would be unreasonable for ordinary citizens)
- United States v. LeBlanc, 490 F.3d 361 (5th Cir. 2007) (probationer’s reduced expectation of privacy; home visits and compliance checks distinguished from searches)
- United States v. Scroggins, 599 F.3d 433 (5th Cir. 2010) (Terry stops and frisks require reasonable, articulable suspicion and may protect officer safety)
- United States v. Majors, 328 F.3d 791 (5th Cir. 2003) (frisk may continue when bulges reasonably may be weapons)
- United States v. Ponce, 8 F.3d 989 (5th Cir. 1993) (protective search may include seizing objects that feel like folded money concealing a weapon)
- United States v. Campbell, 178 F.3d 345 (5th Cir. 1999) (removal of pocket contents justified where bulge might be a weapon)
- United States v. Jenson, 462 F.3d 399 (5th Cir. 2006) (pat-downs permissible for officer protection even without consent)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (authorizes brief stops and protective frisks for officer safety)