647 F. App'x 419
5th Cir.2016Background
- Confidential informant (reliable from prior assistance) told BRPD Detective Burtwell that Joseph Clark sold heroin from his apartment and had a handgun; a controlled purchase corroborated the tip.
- Police obtained a search warrant for the apartment and any vehicles on the premises on October 3, 2014; before executing it, officers surveilled the apartment.
- On October 7, officers saw Clark leave, followed his car, stopped it on a public road, handcuffed Clark and his passenger, gave Miranda warnings, and transported them back to the apartment.
- About 15–30 minutes after the stop and after executing the apartment warrant, officers searched Clark’s person and vehicle and found one gram of heroin on him and 22 ounces of heroin under the driver’s seat; the apartment search revealed a handgun.
- Clark was indicted for possession of a firearm by a felon and possession with intent to distribute heroin; the district court suppressed the person/vehicle evidence, reasoning searches were not incident to a lawful arrest and the warrant could not support those searches because Clark had left the premises.
- The Government appealed, arguing the searches were incident to a probable-cause arrest; the Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded, finding probable cause existed and the searches were lawful incident to arrest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence of probable cause to arrest Clark | No valid contemporaneous basis; warrant couldn’t justify search of person/vehicle because Clark left the immediate vicinity | Informant + controlled buy created probable cause for arrest | Probable cause existed based on informant corroborated by controlled purchase; arrest lawful |
| Search of person incident to arrest | Search violating Fourth Amendment because not contemporaneous with probable-cause showing | Search of person was lawful incident to a valid arrest | Search of person was lawful; full search incident to arrest requires no additional justification (Robinson) |
| Search of vehicle incident to arrest | Vehicle search not supported because warrant for premises didn’t extend once Clark left immediate vicinity | Vehicle search lawful incident to arrest because officers reasonably believed evidence of the offense would be found in the car | Vehicle search lawful as incident to arrest when evidence of offense might be in vehicle (Gant) |
| Timing/staleness of probable cause | Probable cause had to be contemporaneous; delay (4–6 days) made arrest/search invalid | Probable cause need not be contemporaneous; timing left to police discretion absent intervening facts undermining informant | Timing did not invalidate probable cause; staleness not shown and courts allow warrantless arrest days after basis for PC (Watson) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hearn, 563 F.3d 95 (5th Cir.) (standard for reviewing suppression and probable cause mixed question)
- United States v. Garcia, 179 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 1999) (warrantless public-place arrest permitted on probable cause)
- United States v. De Los Santo, 810 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1987) (corroborated informant info can establish probable cause)
- United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (1976) (warrantless arrests supported by probable cause can occur even after delay)
- Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (2003) (probable cause assessed from facts known before arrest)
- United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973) (full search of person incident to lawful arrest requires no additional justification)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (vehicle search incident to arrest permissible when evidence of offense of arrest might be found in vehicle)