United States v. ROSARIO, 2:17-cr-00553

Indictment (Oct. 11, 2017) charges Herman Rosario and Yatska Melendez with conspiracy to distribute heroin, crack cocaine, fentanyl, and tramadol; Rosario faces additional firearm and possession counts.
Police investigation in June 2017 of drug sales near East Wishart Street used a confidential informant who bought heroin multiple times; surveillance linked Rosario to transactions and to two North Philadelphia locations where large quantities of drugs, cash, and a gun were seized on June 28.
Affidavit alleged Rosario was residing at 1611 S. 28th St. (South Philly) and using a gray Mazda; surveillance from July 5–12 observed Rosario arriving, parking, and entering/exiting that address while driving the Mazda.
Magistrate issued a state search warrant for 1611 S. 28th St.; executed July 14, 2017, resulting in seizure of large quantities of heroin/fentanyl/tramadol mixtures, crack cocaine, packaging/paraphernalia, cash, cell phones, mail to Melendez, and a loaded Glock; both defendants were present.
Defendants moved to suppress evidence seized at 1611 S. 28th St., arguing the affidavit lacked sufficient probable cause/nexus between North Philly drug activity and the South Philly residence.
District court concluded both defendants had standing (Rosario as occupant; Melendez as overnight guest) and denied suppression, finding the affidavit provided a substantial basis for probable cause and, alternatively, that the good-faith exception applied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing to challenge search	N/A (Gov’t concedes Melendez stayed overnight)	Rosario and Melendez have standing to contest search	Both have Fourth Amendment standing (Rosario occupant; Melendez overnight guest)
Probable cause to search 1611 S. 28th St.	Warrant affidavit showed nexus: surveillance, prior seizures, informant buys, and officer expertise	Affidavit lacked sufficient nexus; locations are distant; surveillance showed only benign activity	Magistrate had a substantial basis: affidavit supported that Rosario was a dealer, domiciled at 1611, and that contraband would be there
Sufficiency given geographic separation	N/A	Distance between North and South Philly (7–12 miles/~30 min) undermines inference that home contained contraband	Distance did not defeat nexus; same city, multiple vehicles, and prior raids made residence a logical repository
Applicability of good-faith exception	N/A	Even if probable cause lacking, officers could not reasonably rely on the warrant	Good-faith exception applies; warrant not so lacking that reliance was unreasonable

United States v. Stearn, 597 F.3d 540 (3d Cir. 2010) (tests for inferring nexus between drug dealing and residence)
Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances standard for probable cause)
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (U.S. 1980) (heightened Fourth Amendment protection for the home)
United States v. Burton, 288 F.3d 91 (3d Cir. 2002) (inferences that dealers store evidence at home)
United States v. Hodge, 246 F.3d 301 (3d Cir. 2001) (probable-cause inferences in drug cases)
United States v. Whitner, 219 F.3d 289 (3d Cir. 2000) (reasonableness of inferring drugs/cash/weapons at dealer’s home)
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984) (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
United States v. Zimmerman, 277 F.3d 426 (3d Cir. 2002) (limits on good-faith reliance where affidavits so lacking as to be unreasonable)
Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91 (U.S. 1990) (overnight guest’s expectation of privacy)
United States v. White, 748 F.3d 507 (3d Cir. 2014) (residential privacy and standing)