707 F. App'x 317
6th Cir.2017Background
- Sgt. Roy Turner received a tip from a confidential informant that Roger Jones Jr. was distributing large quantities of crack cocaine from a Lark Street residence; Turner had prior experience with this source and knew Jones’s criminal history.
- Turner conducted a drive-by and observed Jones at the house, then prepared an affidavit and sought a no-knock search warrant; he used Google Earth images and an approximate (incorrect) street number in the affidavit.
- A judge issued the no-knock warrant; officers entered the residence, restrained Jones, and seized cocaine, crack, and a scale from a kitchen cabinet.
- Jones moved to suppress the evidence, arguing (1) lack of probable cause because the informant’s reliability was not established, (2) the warrant was invalid due to a mistaken address, and (3) the search violated Tennessee Rule 41 (and knocking requirements).
- The district court denied suppression; Jones pleaded guilty but reserved the right to appeal the suppression ruling, raising the three issues above.
Issues
| Issue | Jones's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause based on confidential informant | Affidavit failed to establish informant reliability and basis of knowledge | Affidavit showed informant’s recent first‑hand observations, prior useful tips, and corroboration by police drive‑by | Affidavit provided a substantial basis for probable cause; warrant valid (deference to issuing judge) |
| Incorrect address in warrant | Wrong address invalidates the warrant and search | Description (photos, physical details) identified the correct house despite wrong number | Minor inaccuracy; description was particular enough so warrant remained valid |
| No‑knock entry / Rule 41 violation | Officers should have knocked; Tennessee Rule 41/knock requirement violated | No‑knock authorized by warrant; affidavit showed reasonable suspicion of danger (gun, violent history) | No‑knock justified; federal Fourth Amendment governs and supports suppression denial |
| Application of Tennessee Rule 41 | State procedure violation requires suppression in federal case | Federal Fourth Amendment and exclusionary rule control; state rule not controlling here | Tennessee Rule 41 inapplicable to federal proceeding; claim fails |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hudson, 405 F.3d 425 (6th Cir.) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- United States v. Carter, 378 F.3d 584 (6th Cir.) (construing facts in government’s favor when denial of suppression)
- United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970 (6th Cir.) (deference to issuing judge; evaluating informant reliability)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (Sup. Ct.) (totality of circumstances test for informant tips)
- United States v. Archibald, 685 F.3d 553 (6th Cir.) (probable cause substantial‑basis standard)
- United States v. Coffee, 434 F.3d 887 (6th Cir.) (use of informant’s history and firsthand observations)
- United States v. Durk, 149 F.3d 464 (6th Cir.) (description of place need not be technically perfect)
- United States v. Pelayo‑Landero, 285 F.3d 491 (6th Cir.) (partial inaccuracies do not automatically invalidate particularity)
- United States v. Beals, 698 F.3d 248 (6th Cir.) (federal proceedings governed by Fourth Amendment, not state procedure)
- United States v. Wright, 16 F.3d 1429 (6th Cir.) (exclusionary rule flows from Fourth Amendment)
- Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385 (Sup. Ct.) (no‑knock exception where reasonable suspicion of danger or futility exists)
- United States v. Johnson, 267 F.3d 498 (6th Cir.) (assessing affidavits supporting no‑knock authority)
- Kelley v. McCafferty, [citation="283 F. App'x 359"] (6th Cir.) (upholding no‑knock warrants on speculative risk factors)