United States v. Shetler
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25901
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Anonymous tip alleged Shetler manufactured and used methamphetamine at his Pomona home; garage attached to residence contained indicators of drug production behind a partition wall.
- Plain-view items behind the partition wall—acetone, beakers, and red phosphorus—were observed during an initial garage sweep.
- Police repeatedly searched the home and garage without warrants or valid consent; Marohn gave consent after officers remained inside the house following the initial illegality.
- DEA later conducted a more thorough search; a wide array of methamphetamine-related materials and firearms were recovered.
- Shetler was Mirandized and confessed to meth manufacture at 1:30 a.m. and later provided statements to DEA agents; his statements were later challenged as fruits of an illegal search.
- District court suppressed post-garage-search evidence but allowed admission of the night-of-arrest statements; conviction was ultimately reversed due to suppression error on those statements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the statements to the DEA were fruit of the illegal searches | Shetler | Shetler | Statements tainted; suppression required. |
| Sufficiency of § 856(a)(1) evidence | Government | Insufficient to prove primary use of residence | Sufficient; jury could infer primary use. |
| Void-for-vagueness as applied to residential drug activity | Government | Unconstitutionally vague as applied | Not void for vagueness under narrowed interpretation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1963) (exclusionary rule applies to fruit of illegal search)
- Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (U.S. 1975) (attenuation and taint analysis for confessions after illegality)
- United States v. Ladum, 141 F.3d 1328 (9th Cir. 1998) (fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine for indirect evidence)
- United States v. Crawford, 372 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2004) (scope of exclusionary rule and interrogation after illegal searches)
- United States v. Washington, 387 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2004) (Miranda warnings do not purge taint from prior illegality)