United States v. Taylor
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 785
6th Cir.2012Background
- Police surveilled the Rendezvous Lane house as part of a drug-trafficking investigation and found Taylor’s mail there.
- A 2008 search of Rendezvous located firearms and the house was connected to a drug operation.
- In March 2009, police obtained arrest warrants for 28 defendants and entered Rendezvous during the arrests.
- A protective sweep occurred during the entry, uncovering a handgun and marijuana upstairs and a machine gun in a closet.
- A later search warrant based on these findings yielded more drugs; Taylor moved to suppress; he entered a conditional plea agreeing to drop some counts and preserve issues for appeal.
- The district court denied suppression; the government cross-appealed on sentencing, which the Supreme Court later addressed in Abbott v. United States.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the protective sweep was lawful | Taylor contends the sweep was unconstitutional. | Taylor argues the sweep lacked articulable suspicion and was mere standard procedure. | Sweep justified by articulable facts; not merely standard procedure. |
| Whether the entry to arrest Taylor at Rendezvous violated Payton | Taylor asserts illegal entry absent reason to believe he was in the home. | Government argues knock-and-announce and presence of a target at the door justify entry. | Initial entry constitutional under Payton. |
| Whether the subsequent protective sweep and separate couch search were reasonable | Taylor contends the sweep was improper and the couch search exceeded scope. | Police acted to ensure safety; sweep identified armed occupants; couch search was reasonable. | Protective sweep justified; couch search reasonable under Buie/Summers principles. |
| Whether the sentence should be vacated and remanded in light of Abbott | N/A (not the focus here). | N/A (applies to government’s cross-appeal for sentencing). | Taylor’s sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing in light of Abbott. |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (protective sweep permissible with articulable facts and limited scope)
- Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (1981) (police may act to secure the area during arrest in a home)
- United States v. Akrawi, 920 F.2d 418 (6th Cir. 1990) (second-floor sweep analyzed for risk; distinguishable facts)
- United States v. Beasley, 199 F. App’x 418 (6th Cir. 2006) (protective sweep considerations in multi-floor residences)
- Abbott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 18 (2010) (affirms interpretation affecting mandatory minimums under § 924(c))