United States v. Jean Baptiste Joseph
700 F. App'x 918
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Joseph was arrested in his rented bedroom after officers, acting on co-defendant and eyewitness statements, believed he committed armed robbery and murder and was inside the house.
- Officers entered without a warrant after the resident answered, confirmed Joseph was inside, and gave permission to enter; Joseph moved quickly into a bedroom upon seeing officers.
- During an immediate protective sweep incident to arrest officers observed and seized an AK-47, ammunition, and drugs in plain view.
- About 1–2 hours after arrest at the station, Joseph signed a written consent form waiving a warrant and authorizing a full search; he had previously declined to give a statement and had read Miranda and the consent form.
- Joseph was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, possession with intent to distribute ethylone and marijuana, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking offense; he received a 660-month total sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Joseph's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Warrantless entry & initial search (exigent circumstances) | Officers lacked exigent circumstances; entry into bedroom unlawful | Officers had probable cause for violent crimes, believed Joseph armed, knew he was inside, and immediate arrest was necessary for safety | Entry and arrest were justified by exigent circumstances; protective sweep lawful |
| Voluntariness of consent to second search | Consent given under coercion; not voluntary | Consent was voluntary: signed written form, advised of right to refuse, had time after arrest, read Miranda and consent, and refused to give a statement earlier | Consent was voluntary under totality of circumstances; second search lawful |
| Career-offender residual clause (guideline application) | Residual clause is void post-Johnson; battery on an officer not a crime of violence; Amendment 798 should apply | Binding precedent upholds guideline application at sentencing; Florida battery on an officer qualifies; Amendment 798 not retroactive on direct appeal | Court applied the guidelines in effect at sentencing; residual-clause use and career-offender designation upheld |
| Substantive reasonableness of 660-month sentence | Sentence excessive given circumstances; argue later that it violates Eighth Amendment (not raised timely) | Sentence within guideline range, court considered §3553(a) factors, defendant’s record and lack of remorse justify sentence | Sentence is procedurally and substantively reasonable; 660 months affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ramirez, 476 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir.) (standard of review for suppression issues)
- United States v. Standridge, 810 F.2d 1034 (11th Cir.) (exigent-circumstances factors for warrantless home entry)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973) (voluntariness of consent judged by totality of circumstances)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion review of sentencing reasonableness)
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (career-offender guideline not vulnerable to Johnson vagueness challenge)
- Rozier v. United States, 701 F.3d 681 (11th Cir.) (Florida battery on officer qualifies as crime of violence under residual clause)
- United States v. Matchett, 802 F.3d 1185 (11th Cir.) (post-Johnson residual-clause jurisprudence)
- United States v. Descent, 292 F.3d 703 (11th Cir.) (apply guidelines in effect at sentencing)