United States v. Hassock
631 F.3d 79
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Investigation began from a confidential source identifying Hassock (a/k/a Basil LNU) as a marijuana dealer living in a Bronx basement apartment.
- Task Force, including ICE, DEA, FBI, NYPD, NYSP, and IRS, sought Hassock's true identity and location.
- Agent Quinn and the team knocked on the Mickle Avenue apartment in hopes of talking to Basil.
- A woman admitted the officers and allowed them to
- to look around; identity of the resident who could consent was unclear.
- Quinn and Salvetti conducted a protective sweep toward the front bedroom; Hassock’s pistol with a defaced serial number was found.
- District Court suppressed the firearm as an unreasonable search; the government appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a protective sweep was justified here | Hassock; protective sweep allowed by Buie | Government; sweep justified due to danger | Not justified; suppression affirmed. |
| Whether the bedroom search exceeded Buie scope | Search was within protective sweep | Search exceeded scope, no proper basis | Search not a valid protective sweep; suppression upheld. |
| Whether the protective sweep doctrine extends when entry is not for arrest/warrant | Buie framework extends beyond arrest context | Protective sweep valid with legitimate entry | Court declines to extend; protects suppression. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Miller, 430 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2005) (protective sweep when entering under lawful process)
- Buie v. United States, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (protective sweep limited to danger to officers inside home)
- United States v. Vargas, 376 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2004) (lack of specific articulable facts defeats sweep)
- United States v. Gandia, 424 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2005) (no justification where no lurking danger shown)
- United States v. Patrick, 959 F.2d 991 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (consent-based protective sweep based on lawful presence)