327 F. Supp. 3d 312
D.D.C.2018Background
- DEA/ICE investigation into Javier Gonzalez and Jamil Roman; a confidential informant (CS) gave statements that led to warrants for Roman’s business (TWC Auto Body) and home (21 Walsh St.).
- Affidavit submitted for multiple warrants misstated that CS received 3 kg of cocaine at Roman’s business (it occurred at CS’s Springfield business); court found material misrepresentations and omissions after a Franks hearing and suppressed the business search.
- On March 25, 2015, agents executed warrants; before the business search was completed, FBI officer Karangekis entered TWC Auto Body, encountered Roman meeting a customer in a partially open office, conducted a pat-frisk, arrested him, and later searched his person, seizing phones and cash.
- Roman moved to suppress: challenged warrantless arrest/search of his person and the search of his residence; the court held further hearings after resolving the Franks issues.
- The court found (1) Karangekis reasonably believed the auto shop was open to the public (unlocked door, customer present, no prohibition on entry), giving lawful presence; (2) officers had probable cause to arrest Roman for drug distribution based on CS and recorded meetings; (3) the reformed affidavit (after Franks) lacked a sufficient nexus to support probable cause to search Roman’s residence; and (4) Leon’s good-faith exception did not apply because agents acted with reckless disregard in preparing the affidavit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of officers' entry into TWC Auto Body | Government: entry lawful because warrant was issued and en route; alternatively, business appeared open to public | Roman: entry violated Fourth Amendment because business was closed and warrantless | Held: Entry lawful — officer reasonably believed business was open (unlocked door, customer present, no restriction) and entry did not violate privacy |
| Probable cause for warrantless arrest at business | Government: probable cause existed from CS, recordings, and other facts | Roman: arrest invalid because warrant and affidavit were tainted by falsehoods | Held: Probable cause existed to arrest Roman for cocaine distribution based on information known when arrest occurred |
| Legality of searches of person incident to arrest | Government: searches were permissible incident to arrest; pat-frisk and later search lawful | Roman: searches unlawful as they flowed from an improper intrusion/arrest | Held: Search of person denied suppression — searches were lawful incident to probable-cause arrest |
| Probable cause to search residence and good-faith exception | Government: magistrate’s warrant decision deserves deference; good-faith Leon exception applies | Roman: reformed affidavit lacks nexus connecting residence to drug activity; prior misrepresentations undermine deference and preclude good faith | Held: Warrant for residence lacked nexus after Franks corrections; Leon good-faith exception unavailable due to affiant’s reckless misrepresentations; suppression granted for residence |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (warrantless felony arrests in public permitted)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (heightened protection for home; arrests in home generally require warrant)
- Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98 (search incident to arrest permissible even if search closely precedes formal arrest)
- Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 (no reasonable expectation of privacy in areas of a business invited to the public)
- United States v. Bonner, 808 F.2d 864 (1st Cir.) (warrant need not be physically present for lawful entry pursuant to warrant)
- United States v. Long, 797 F.3d 558 (8th Cir.) (facts supporting that a commercial premises was open to the public)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (false statements/omissions in affidavit can require suppression and warrant invalidation)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (probable cause requires sufficient factual basis; conclusory statements insufficient)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule; exception unavailable where affiant acted recklessly or dishonestly)
- Zurcher v. Stanford Daily, 436 U.S. 547 (nexus requirement: must show evidence of crime likely to be found at place searched)