United States v. Montieth
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 24078
4th Cir.2011Background
- Montieth was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) for using and carrying a firearm during a drug-trafficking crime.
- Officers conducted a trash pull at Montieth’s residence after a tip of marijuana trafficking, uncovering items linking him to drug activity.
- A warrant was obtained (June 11, 2008) to search Montieth’s residence for marijuana, firearms, and related contraband.
- To minimize danger to Montieth’s family, officers detained him away from the residence and sought his cooperation to execute the warrant.
- Montieth admitted marijuana involvement; police seized marijuana, firearms, cash, and paraphernalia and searched a backyard shed.
- Montieth moved to suppress all evidence and statements; the district court denied, and he appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the warrant validly issued for the Montieth residence? | Montieth contends affidavit deficiencies challenge probable cause. | Montieth argues warrant relied on insufficient or improperly gathered information. | The warrant was supported by probable cause and properly issued. |
| Was the traffic stop/detention during the warrant execution permissible under the Fourth Amendment? | Montieth asserts detention away from the home was unlawful. | Montieth argues Summers framework does not permit distant detentions during a search. | Detention was reasonable under Summers and accompanying circuit authority; lawful. |
| Was the detention’s proximity to the residence and method of execution lawful given safety concerns? | Montieth claims no information justified a forced entry risk; detention was improper. | Officers reasonably detained to ensure safety and avoid forcible entry; consensual execution was prudent. | Detention outside the residence was reasonable under the circumstances. |
| Were Montieth’s statements obtained in violation of Miranda during the stop or search? | Statements before warnings were elicited unlawfully during custodial interrogation. | Statements fit Innis’ or spontaneous-uncurtailed framework; waiver occurred. | Miranda satisfied; statements admissible. |
| Should evidence seized from the shed and home be suppressed for curtilage or search-warrant scope issues? | Warrant didn’t explicitly include the shed; evidence should be suppressed. | Shed within curtilage; search warrant for residence covered it. | Shed was within curtilage; search lawful. |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause evaluated via totality of the circumstances)
- Andresen v. Maryland, 427 U.S. 463 (1976) (particularity and location of items in warrant)
- Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (1981) (detention of occupants during a lawful search)
- Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93 (2005) (detention during a search is categorical and not limited by proximity)
- Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980) (definition of interrogation and what constitutes elicitation)
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (police safety and scoping for dangerous conditions in home searches)
- United States v. Hurwitz, 459 F.3d 463 (2006) (Fourth Amendment compliance where officers fail to leave a copy of the warrant)
- United States v. Taylor, 857 F.2d 210 (1988) (reasonable suspicion-based stop related to narcotics investigations)
- United States v. Cochran, 939 F.2d 337 (1991) (reasonableness of detention to execute a warrant)
- United States v. Bailey, 652 F.3d 197 (2011) (detention timing after leaving residence; Summers framework applied)