United States v. Robert Lewis Morgan, 713 F. App'x 829

Robert Morgan entered a conditional guilty plea to conspiracy to import flakka, aggravated identity theft, and money laundering, reserving only limited appellate rights to contest suppression of cellphone evidence.
Morgan reserved two specific suppression challenges: (1) lawfulness of discovery of 14 false Florida driver's licenses, and (2) whether the government unreasonably delayed obtaining a warrant to search his cellphone. Other suppression-related arguments were not preserved and were waived.
Law enforcement seized Morgan’s cellphone and held it for 17 days before obtaining a warrant to search its contents.
Morgan admitted the phone had been used in illegal activity and that another person used it to commit crimes; he did not request return of the phone.
Agents began drafting the warrant the day after seizure; the primary agent left town but arranged for other agents to present the warrant and deliver the phone to a forensic analyst.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Morgan waived various suppression claims by pleading guilty conditionally	Morgan challenged seizure, arrest, girlfriend’s consent, statements, and delay	Government: Morgan’s conditional plea preserved only specified challenges; other grounds were waived	Court: Most suppression claims waived; only delay in obtaining warrant to search cellphone preserved
Whether a 17‑day warrantless seizure of the cellphone (with probable cause) violated the Fourth Amendment	Morgan: 17‑day delay was unreasonable and violated Fourth Amendment	Government: probable cause existed and agents diligently pursued a warrant; temporary seizure was reasonable	Court: Seizure reasonable; government acted diligently; no Fourth Amendment violation
Effect of Morgan’s admissions about phone use on privacy interest	Morgan: retained possessory privacy interest despite admissions	Government: admissions diminished Morgan’s privacy interest and increased government interest in preserving evidence	Court: Admissions reduced Morgan’s privacy interest and weighed for reasonableness of delay
Whether law enforcement acted diligently in obtaining the warrant despite agent’s travel	Morgan: delay reflected unreasonable law enforcement conduct	Government: agents began warrant drafting immediately and delegated tasks when primary agent left town	Court: government acted diligently (delegation and prompt steps supported reasonableness)

United States v. Patti, 337 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2003) (guilty pleas generally waive nonjurisdictional defects)
Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326 (2001) (temporary warrantless seizures may be reasonable if police diligently obtain a warrant)
United States v. Laist, 702 F.3d 608 (11th Cir. 2012) (totality-of-circumstances test and diligence inquiry for warrant delay)
United States v. Johns, 469 U.S. 478 (1985) (failure to request return of seized property undermines delay-based Fourth Amendment claims)
United States v. Mitchell, 565 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2009) (delegation to other officers can show reasonableness of delay)