United States v. Jones
667 F.3d 477
| 4th Cir. | 2012Background
- Cherokee County officers investigated burn victim with meth lab injuries connected to the Joneses’ residence; a protective sweep uncovered plain-view items suggesting meth manufacturing, leading to a search warrant.
- Joneses were arrested on-site; Officers conducted a protective sweep of the home to ensure safety before executing the warrant.
- Search warrant executed later that day seized meth, drug paraphernalia, and related materials found during the sweep.
- Indictment charged conspiracy regarding manufacture and distribution of meth; Joneses entered conditional guilty pleas preserving the right to appeal denials of suppression.
- District court denied suppression motions under Buie; Joneses appealed, challenging the protective sweep as unconstitutional; Simmons required resentencing considerations for Kipling Jones.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the protective sweep of the Jones residence was constitutionally permissible | Joneses argue insufficient articulable facts for danger inside | Government contends facts supported risk to officers | Yes, protective sweep permissible under Buie standards |
| Whether Kipling Jones’s prior North Carolina conviction qualifies as a career-offender predicate | Jones contends predicate is not a qualifying felony under §4B1.1 | Government maintains conviction qualifies as prior felony | No; predicate not a qualifying felony after Simmons remand, remand for resentencing |
| Whether Simmons requires remand for Kipling Jones’s sentence based on career-offender calculation | Remand necessary to correct improper career-offender designation | Government concedes but seeks no further relief beyond remand | Remand for resentencing consistent with Simmons; sentence vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (protective sweep for safety during arrest; limits and purpose of sweep)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980) (home entry generally warrantless searches invalid; sanctuary of the home principle)
- Kentucky v. King, 131 S. Ct. 1849 (2011) (reasonableness standard; warrantless exceptions narrow and well delineated)
- Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (emergency aid and in-home intrusion considerations; danger assessment in homes)
- United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (2011) (en banc; remand for re-sentencing when Simmons principle applies)