United States v. Joh Dwayne Riley
706 F. App'x 956
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Riley was on community control (a form of probation) when an anonymous tip reported drug sales at his home and identified his vehicle as a white Audi.
- Probation officers, aware of Riley’s prior cocaine conviction and probation conditions forbidding drugs and visits to drug places, visited his residence.
- Officers entered the garage during a probationary search based on reasonable suspicion and observed apparent cocaine in plain view in the Audi.
- After discovering the contraband, officers ceased the probationary search and sought a warrant; evidence from the search led to Riley’s indictment for possession with intent to distribute 500+ grams of cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 841) and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)).
- At trial Riley moved to suppress the search evidence, sought a mistrial after testimony referenced the anonymous tip contrary to a pretrial ruling, challenged certain evidentiary rulings (including reliance on unpublished decisions), and contended insufficient evidence supported the § 924(c) conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Riley's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probationary search reasonable suspicion | Anonymous tip alone (identifying him) cannot support reasonable suspicion; search should be suppressed | Totality of circumstances (tip + prior conviction + probation conditions + tip identifying car + inability to drive legally) created reasonable suspicion | Denial of suppression affirmed — officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct probationary search |
| Mistrial for witness violating pretrial exclusion | Probation officer’s testimony about the tip violated pretrial ruling and Confrontation Clause, requiring mistrial | Testimony explained officers’ actions (non-hearsay); limited violation, not prejudicial | Denial of mistrial affirmed — testimony admitted for non-hearsay purpose and did not violate confrontation rights |
| Reliance on unpublished Elec. Ct. opinions for evidentiary rulings | Reliance on unpublished decisions was improper and prejudicial (esp. re: lay witness testimony) | Unpublished opinions are persuasive; court properly evaluated and used them; lay testimony fell within Rule 701 limits | Affirmed — court permissibly relied on unpublished authorities and allowed lay-narrative testimony based on officers’ particularized experience |
| Sufficiency of evidence for § 924(c) (constructive possession and "in furtherance") | Evidence insufficient to show constructive possession or nexus between gun and drug trafficking | Gun was within Riley’s dominion (next to his hands), loaded, illegally possessed, found near >1,000 g cocaine — supports constructive possession and in-furtherance nexus | Conviction affirmed — reasonable jury could infer constructive possession and that gun furthered drug trafficking |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (Balancing test; reasonable suspicion sufficient for searches of probationers with diminished privacy interests)
- United States v. Yuknavich, 419 F.3d 1302 (11th Cir.) (probationer searches may be reasonable on reasonable suspicion; totality-of-circumstances analysis)
- United States v. Carter, 566 F.3d 970 (11th Cir.) (reasonable suspicion standard for probationary home searches where probation conditions reduce privacy)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Confrontation Clause bars testimonial hearsay unless declarant unavailable and prior cross-examined; non-testimonial statements may be used for non-hearsay purposes)
- United States v. Williams, 731 F.3d 1222 (11th Cir.) (elements required to prove § 924(c) offense)
- United States v. Timmons, 283 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir.) (factors to establish firearm possession "in furtherance" of drug trafficking)
- United States v. Novaton, 271 F.3d 968 (11th Cir.) (law enforcement officers may provide lay opinion testimony based on particularized investigative experience)