United States v. Serrano
695 F. App'x 20
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Andy Serrano was convicted after a bench trial of being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).
- Police approached Serrano after receiving an anonymous tip implicating Serrano and Christina Colon in possession of a gun; officers observed a handbag containing a firearm when they approached.
- Serrano testified he was stopped, tapped on the shoulder, and removed from a store before questioning; officers testified they encountered him standing by a fence and only asked questions without physical contact or display of weapons.
- Officers ordered Serrano arrested only after observing the gun; the district court found probable cause for the arrest based on the gun and the tip.
- Serrano moved to suppress the gun and his post-arrest statement, arguing the initial encounter was an unlawful seizure based on an anonymous tip and that he had standing to challenge the search of the handbag.
- The district court denied suppression; the Second Circuit affirmed, deferring to credibility findings and concluding no Fourth Amendment seizure occurred prior to arrest and Serrano lacked standing to challenge the handbag search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether police seizure occurred when officers first approached Serrano | Serrano: approach + tapping = seizure; no reasonable suspicion because tip was anonymous | Government: initial encounter was consensual questioning, not a seizure; seizure occurred at arrest | No seizure before arrest; encounter was non-coercive and consensual |
| Whether Serrano had standing to challenge search of the handbag | Serrano: he owned the bag and thus had a privacy interest | Government: Serrano disavowed ownership in earlier affidavit and was not in possession when police arrived | Serrano failed to prove ownership or expectation of privacy; no standing |
| Whether post-arrest statement was fruit of illegal stop/search | Serrano: statement tainted by earlier illegal seizure/search | Government: no illegal seizure occurred before arrest; arrest supported by probable cause after gun observed | Statement admissible; not fruit of unconstitutional seizure |
| Appropriateness of district court credibility/findings | Serrano: district court erred in crediting officers over his testimony | Government: district court credibility determinations entitled to deference | Court defers to district court; factual findings not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Freeman, 735 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2013) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- United States v. Lucky, 569 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 2009) (mixed questions review)
- United States v. Jiau, 734 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2013) (deference to district court credibility findings)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. 1980) (tests for when an encounter becomes a seizure)
- United States v. Lee, 916 F.2d 814 (2d Cir. 1990) (consensual police encounters vs. seizures)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (U.S. 1983) (approach and questioning can be non-seizure)
- United States v. Peterson, 100 F.3d 7 (2d Cir. 1996) (officer approach without seizure)
- United States v. Glover, 957 F.2d 1004 (2d Cir. 1992) (non-threatening questioning not a seizure)
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (U.S. 1991) (seizure not established simply because officer asks questions)
- United States v. Paulino, 850 F.2d 93 (2d Cir. 1988) (burden to show defendant's own Fourth Amendment rights were violated)
- United States v. Rahme, 813 F.2d 31 (2d Cir. 1987) (legitimate expectation of privacy analysis)
- Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1980) (no standing to challenge search of another’s purse when defendant lacked expectation of privacy)
- United States v. Thompson, 35 F.3d 100 (2d Cir. 1994) (fruit of the poisonous tree discussion)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1963) (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine)