United States v. Herbert Green, 39 F.4th 510

Police received a drug-dog alert on a package sent to Herbert Green’s apartment and conducted a controlled delivery.
Green acknowledged the delivery, placed the package inside his apartment, and was arrested when he exited.
Officers obtained a state warrant to seize and open the package; it contained over 24 pounds of marijuana.
During an unlawful protective sweep (previously held unconstitutional), officers also searched the apartment and Green’s phone, finding photos of firearms and large amounts of currency; a criminal-history check showed Green was a convicted felon.
On prior appeal this court held the protective sweep unconstitutional and remanded for factual findings on whether the independent source doctrine applied.
After an evidentiary hearing the district court found officers would have sought a federal warrant regardless, and that probable cause supported such a warrant independent of tainted information; this court affirms.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether police would have sought a warrant absent the unlawful sweep	Green: police relied on sweep information; would not have sought federal warrant absent sweep	Government: independent pre-warrant facts (dog alert, controlled delivery, seizure of package with >24 lbs marijuana, phone photos, felon status) would have prompted a warrant	District court’s finding that police would have sought a federal warrant is not clearly erroneous; affirmed
Whether probable cause supported a warrant once tainted information is excluded	Green: tainted sweep/info undermines probable cause	Government: remaining untainted facts (dog alert, delivery/placement, seized marijuana, phone photos, felon status) establish a fair probability of more contraband/evidence in apartment	Court holds probable cause existed independent of tainted information; warrant valid
Whether consent to search Green’s phone was coerced (taint argument)	Green: photos on phone were tainted because consent to search phone was coerced	Government: no record evidence of coercion; consent valid	Court finds Green did not waive claim but there is no evidence consent was coerced; no suppression on that basis

United States v. Green, 9 F.4th 682 (8th Cir. 2021) (prior appeal holding the protective sweep unconstitutional)
United States v. Anguiano, 934 F.3d 871 (8th Cir. 2019) (explaining the independent source doctrine)
United States v. Swope, 542 F.3d 609 (8th Cir. 2008) (government bears burden to prove independent source requirements)
United States v. Keck, 2 F.4th 1085 (8th Cir. 2021) (probable-cause standard under the totality of the circumstances)
United States v. Murillo-Salgado, 854 F.3d 407 (8th Cir. 2017) (probable-cause and fair-probability formulation)
United States v. Williams, 605 F.3d 556 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard for reviewing district court factual findings for clear error)
United States v. Lalley, 257 F.3d 751 (8th Cir. 2001) (clarifying the clear-error standard)