United States v. Sidney Brown, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13463

Background

An informant reported cocaine and drug dealing at Brown's house; officer sought a search warrant based on the informant's statements.
A magistrate issued the warrant; executing it produced cocaine, a Beretta pistol, and $4,700 in Brown's home, which Brown admitted was his.
Brown moved to suppress the seized evidence, arguing lack of probable cause and, alternatively, seeking a Franks hearing for alleged false statements.
The district court denied the suppression motion; trial proceeded with Brown convicted on three counts including a 924(c) firearm charge.
On appeal, Brown challenges the denial of suppression, the Franks hearing denial, and the sufficiency of the 924(c) evidence; the panel reviews under de novo for suppression and applies standard sufficiency review for the 924(c) count.
The court affirms the district court, finding probable cause supported by the totality of the circumstances, no Franks hearing required, and sufficient evidence for the 924(c) conviction.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable-cause sufficiency for the warrant	Brown argues the affidavit failed to show probable cause.	Brown contends the informant reliability and corroboration were inadequately described.	Probable cause established; magistrate's determination affirmed.
Franks hearing availability	Brown contends the affidavit contains false statements justifying a Franks hearing.	Brown asserts the proffered false statements, if any, undermine probable cause.	No Franks hearing required; substantial content supports probable cause even without alleged false statement.
Sufficiency of evidence for 18 U.S.C. 924(c) firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking	Brown challenges the nexus between the gun and the drug-trafficking crime.	Government presents Mackey-factor-based evidence linking the gun to drug sales.	Sufficient evidence; any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Key Cases Cited

United States v. Leake, 998 F.2d 1359 (6th Cir. 1993) (de novo review of magistrate's probable-cause determination with deference to magistrate)
United States v. Greene, 250 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2001) (reliability of informant and totality-of-circumstances approach for probable cause)
United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970 (6th Cir. 2000) (en banc; reliability of direct-confidential-informant observations may obviate further corroboration)
United States v. Finch, 998 F.2d 349 (6th Cir. 1993) (corroboration standards for informants; part of reliability analysis)
United States v. Dudek, 560 F.2d 1288 (6th Cir. 1977) (informant reliability and corroboration considerations in suppression rulings)
Greene v. United States, 250 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2001) (reliability and corroboration standards for informants)
Graham v. United States, 275 F.3d 490 (6th Cir. 2001) (Franks v. Delaware standards and defective-affidavit analysis)
Mastromatteo v. United States, 538 F.3d 535 (6th Cir. 2008) (Franks hearing standard and handling of false statements in warrants)
United States v. Davidson, 936 F.2d 856 (6th Cir. 1991) (probable-cause review under totality-of-the-circumstances)
United States v. Ham, 628 F.3d 801 (6th Cir. 2011) (Mackey six-factor test for nexus between firearm and crime)
United States v. Mackey, 265 F.3d 457 (6th Cir. 2001) (six non-exclusive factors to determine 'in furtherance' of drug trafficking)
United States v. Gill, 685 F.3d 606 (6th Cir. 2012) (six-factor framework for nexus in 924(c) cases)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency review standard for criminal convictions)
United States v. White, 932 F.2d 588 (6th Cir. 1991) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the government's evidence)