United States v. Oliver
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 289
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Oliver was indicted in 2007 for a scheme using victims’ identities to file unemployment claims and faced multiple counts including mail fraud, identity theft, and theft of federal funds.
- He moved to suppress evidence from a cardboard box and a laptop, and challenged custodial statements as involuntary under the Fifth Amendment.
- Police obtained, or attempted to obtain, a warrant; a private search of the box by Oliver's girlfriend Armstrong preceded Government review of the box and laptop.
- Oliver pled guilty to one count of aiding and abetting mail fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft under a conditional plea, preserving appellate rights on suppression issues.
- Sentencing produced a guidelines range and concurrent/separate terms; Oliver later challenged various post-judgment rulings, resulting in this appeal challenging suppression, voluntariness of waivers, and factual support for identity theft.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the cardboard box search complied with the Fourth Amendment | Oliver | Oliver | Private search doctrine permitted government review |
| Whether the notebook’s contents were within the scope of the private search | Oliver | Oliver | Notebooks’ contents were obvious and within scope |
| Whether the laptop search/seizure evidence was properly supported by an independent source | Oliver | Oliver | Independent source doctrine applied; warrant valid |
| Whether Oliver’s post-arrest statements were voluntary Miranda waivers | Oliver | Oliver | Waiver voluntary despite no signed form |
| Whether the clothes-pocket evidence was timely raised and suppressible | Oliver | Oliver | Waived due to late reconsideration; no error |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jacobsen, 466 F.3d 109 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (private search doctrine; police view within scope of private search)
- United States v. Runyan, 275 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2001) (private search scope depends on knowledge of private search)
- Paige v. United States, 136 F.3d 1012 (5th Cir. 1998) (foreseeability and privacy in private home searches; narrow application)
- United States v. Berghuis, 130 S. Ct. 2250 (Supreme Court 2010) (voluntary waiver of Miranda rights; factual inquiry)
- United States v. Chapa-Garza, 62 F.3d 118 (5th Cir. 1995) (Miranda waiver and knowingness; presence of advice concerns)
- United States v. Gonzalez, 259 F.3d 355 (5th Cir. 2001) (plea colloquy sufficiency for waiver understanding)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (Supreme Court 2009) (exclusionary rule deterrence and police mistakes)
- United States v. Grosenheider, 200 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2000) (distinct, untainted source doctrine for tainted evidence)
- Story v. United States, 439 F.3d 226 (5th Cir. 2006) (waivers of appeal in plea agreements; contract approach)