888 F.3d 922
8th Cir.2018Background
- DOC fugitive unit had an arrest warrant for Randy Ford and received an untested tip that Ford was staying at a Des Moines residence owned by "Dawn," that Ford used a cell phone in the southeast bedroom window as a surveillance device, and that he had recently been seen with a handgun and might be suicidal.
- Officers corroborated that the house belonged to Dawn and observed a cell phone in the southeast bedroom window; a woman at the house either indicated Ford was inside (officers’ version) or said she did not know (her version); the district court credited officers.
- Several officers entered the residence without knocking, cleared rooms, and found Ford hiding in the southwest bedroom closet; after arrest, officers moved the bed in the southeast bedroom and observed a handgun in plain view; Ford admitted the gun was his.
- Ford moved to suppress the gun and his statements; the district court denied suppression after an evidentiary hearing; Ford pleaded guilty and received a 180-month mandatory minimum under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
- On appeal Ford challenged (1) warrantless entry into the home, (2) scope of the protective sweep, and (3) ACCA predicate status of prior convictions (including three burglaries, an assault with a dangerous weapon, and two drug convictions).
- The court affirmed denial of suppression and affirmed ACCA sentence, holding the entry and protective sweep were reasonable and that the assault and drug convictions qualified as ACCA predicates while Iowa burglaries did not.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Warrantless entry into third-party home to execute arrest warrant | Officers reasonably believed Ford was a co-resident and present based on corroborated tip and observations | Entry was unlawful; curtains/bedroom layout made claimed observations impossible | Affirmed: totality of circumstances (corroborated tip, cell phone in SE window, woman’s indication, credited testimony) supported reasonable belief to enter |
| Scope of protective sweep after arrest | Sweep and moving furniture were reasonable given risk Ford was armed and may be suicidal; gun in plain view was properly seized | Sweep exceeded Buie limits and post-arrest search was unlawful for uncovering the gun | Affirmed: no plain error—officers had specific, articulable facts to justify sweep and moving bed while searching for suspect |
| ACCA predicate determination (burglaries, assault, drug convictions) | Burglaries not ACCA predicates after Mathis; assault with dangerous weapon and drug convictions qualify as violent felony / serious drug offenses | Ford argued burglary convictions shouldn’t count and thus ACCA classification was improper | Affirmed: burglaries not ACCA predicates, but assault conviction qualifies as violent felony and drug convictions (methamphetamine) qualify as serious drug offenses under the modified categorical approach, giving three predicates for ACCA |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (warrant for arrest allows limited entry into dwelling when suspect is believed present)
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (permissible protective sweeps incident to arrest)
- Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128 (plain-view seizure rule)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (categorical approach for predicate offenses)
- Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (limits on expanding statutes beyond generic crime)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (distinguishing elements from means; modified categorical approach)
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (definition of "physical force" for violent felony)
- United States v. Glover, 746 F.3d 369 (corroborated anonymous tip can support belief suspect is co-resident)
- United States v. Boyd, 180 F.3d 967 (informant corroboration and presence support entry)
- United States v. Brown, 598 F.3d 1013 (simulated controlled substances not ACCA predicates)
- United States v. Pulliam, 566 F.3d 784 (display/use of weapon capable of lethal use is violent felony)