United States v. Randal McLean, 581 F. App'x 228

Police received CS tip that narcotics were being stored in a vacant house on the 2200 block of Guilford Ave; officers surveilled the rear door the next morning.
Detectives observed Randal McLean twice unlock/enter 2204 Guilford for brief periods, retrieve items, hand packaging to an associate, then facilitate apparent hand-to-hand cash-for-items exchanges with third parties.
Officers arrested McLean without a warrant nearby; they found a key on him that fit the rear-door padlock; plain-view drugs were observed inside the house and later seized pursuant to warrants for the house and McLean’s nearby residence.
McLean was charged with possession with intent to distribute cocaine and possession of ammunition by a convicted felon; a jury convicted him of the drug count and acquitted on the ammunition count; sentence: 120 months.
The government sought to admit two prior felony drug convictions (2004, 2005) under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b); the district court admitted them with a limiting instruction; McLean appealed suppression and 404(b) rulings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers had probable cause for a warrantless arrest	McLean: officers had at most reasonable suspicion; observations were insufficient for arrest	Government: officers’ observations + narcotics experience gave probable cause to arrest for drug distribution	Held: Probable cause existed; denial of suppression affirmed
Whether evidence seized incident to the arrest should be suppressed	McLean: arrest unlawful so seizure tainted	Government: seizure lawful as incident to valid arrest and plain-view observations supported warrants	Held: Seizure admissible; suppression denial affirmed
Whether two prior drug convictions were admissible under Rule 404(b)	McLean: priors were remote, irrelevant, unnecessary, and unfairly prejudicial	Government: priors showed identity, knowledge, intent, pattern, and were disclosed in advance; limiting instruction given	Held: Priors admissible under 404(b); district court did not abuse discretion
Whether admission of priors violated Rule 403 balancing	McLean: probative value substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice	Government: priors were not more sensational than charged offense; limiting instruction mitigated prejudice	Held: No abuse of discretion; Rule 403 balance satisfied

Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31 (probable-cause standard for arrests)
Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (review and role of officer experience in Fourth Amendment determinations)
Gates v. United States, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances for probable cause)
Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (practical, nontechnical probable-cause conception)
United States v. Humphries, 372 F.3d 653 (warrantless public-arrest probable cause rule in 4th Cir.)
United States v. McCoy, 513 F.3d 405 (deference to fact-specific reasonable-suspicion/probable-cause inquiries)
United States v. Queen, 132 F.3d 991 (four-factor test for admitting Rule 404(b) evidence)
United States v. Byers, 649 F.3d 197 (consideration of geographic proximity and necessity under Rule 404(b))
United States v. McBride, 676 F.3d 385 (application of relevance and necessity prongs under Queen)