United States v. Jimmie White, II
679 F. App'x 426
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- DEA executed a search warrant at Jimmie White’s Detroit home on May 14, 2010; agents found ~900 BZP pills, >$25,000 cash, and an unloaded 9mm Cobray with an obliterated serial number in a locked safe in the master bedroom.
- Investigation used a Title III wiretap (Feb–Mar 2010) and state tracking warrants for White’s cell phone; tracking warrants were for continuous location data.
- White was arrested during the search, admitted selling ecstasy and that the safe was his, but denied knowledge of the gun; he was released into state custody the same day on an outstanding Ohio warrant and later prosecuted federally in 2013.
- Federal complaint filed April 29, 2013; White arrested May 2, 2013, indicted June 4, 2013 on conspiracy and possession counts including § 924(c) and § 922(g).
- District court denied White’s motions to dismiss for Speedy Trial Act and Sixth Amendment violations and denied suppression of cell-phone tracking data (relying on Leon or harmlessness); jury convicted on all counts and sentenced to 84 months (60 months consecutive on § 924(c)).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speedy Trial Act (pre-indictment 30-day requirement) | White: indictment not filed within 30 days of his 2013 arrest so Act violated | Gov: parties stipulated to exclude two weeks of plea negotiations under § 3161(h)(1) | Held: Exclusion valid; plea negotiations are excludable under § 3161(h)(1); no Act violation |
| Sixth Amendment speedy trial | White: ~3-year delay (2010 arrest to 2013 prosecution) violated Sixth Amendment | Gov: Sixth Amendment not triggered until May 2013 arrest on federal complaint; earlier 2010 custody was on unrelated state warrant | Held: Sixth Amendment not triggered until he was arrested and held to answer federal charges in 2013; five-month delay thereafter not presumptively prejudicial |
| Suppression of cell-phone tracking data | White: tracking warrants were insufficiently particular; tracking data should be suppressed | Gov: even if warrants defective, Leon good-faith exception applies and, in any event, tracking data was not introduced or did not prejudice White | Held: No reversible error—White fails to show prejudice; tracking evidence not used at trial and suppression would be harmless |
| Sufficiency of firearms evidence (§ 922(g) and § 924(c)) | White: insufficient evidence of possession and of a nexus between gun and drug trafficking | Gov: constructive possession and nexus shown by gun’s location in locked safe in master bedroom with drugs/cash, obliterated serial number, magazine adjacent | Held: Evidence sufficient—constructive possession established by dominion over bedroom/safe; nexus to drug trafficking for § 924(c) proven under Mackey factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Bloate v. United States, 559 U.S. 196 (automatic exclusions under § 3161(h)(1) may be applied without district court findings)
- Dunbar v. United States, 357 F.3d 582 (6th Cir. rule that plea negotiations are excludable under § 3161(h)(1))
- Bowers v. United States, 834 F.2d 607 (plea bargaining process qualifies as "other proceedings" under § 3161(h)(1))
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (four-factor Barker test for Sixth Amendment speedy trial claims)
- MacDonald v. United States, 456 U.S. 1 (Sixth Amendment triggered by arrest and holding to answer criminal charges)
- Loud Hawk v. United States, 474 U.S. 302 (distinguishing preindictment investigation from Sixth Amendment speedy-trial trigger)
- Marion v. United States, 404 U.S. 307 (limitations on Sixth Amendment protection before formal charges)
- Mackey v. United States, 265 F.3d 457 (factors for proving possession of a firearm "in furtherance of" drug trafficking)