784 F.3d 1232
8th Cir.2015Background
- Matthews, a felon, was convicted of being in possession of a firearm and sentenced to 96 months.
- Police searched Matthews’s apartment based on a stolen-gun report and two drug-dog alerts, recovering the gun and other items.
- Hines reported the gun as stolen and identified Matthews as a potential suspect.
- The apartment building allowed police 24/7 access via a lockbox, and drug-dog sniffs occurred in the common hallway outside Matthews’s door.
- Matthews moved to suppress the evidence; the district court denied, and the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether drug-dog sniffs outside a door support probable cause for a warrant | Matthews argues Jardines invalidates the sniffs, excluding the evidence. | Matthews contends reliance on binding precedent does not save an unlawful sniff. | Exclusionary rule did not apply; probable cause based on sniffs upheld. |
| Whether the § 2K2.1(b)(4) stolen-firearm enhancement applied | Matthews contends no permanent deprivation, so not stolen. | Court correctly applied enhancement given de facto deprivation and ownership rights. | Enhancement applied; firearm considered stolen for purposes of § 2K2.1(b)(4). |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Scott, 610 F.3d 1009 (8th Cir. 2010) (doorframe sniff not a Fourth Amendment search per binding precedent)
- United States v. Sundby, 186 F.3d 873 (8th Cir. 1999) (positive dog-sniff alone can establish probable cause)
- United States v. Davis, 760 F.3d 901 (8th Cir. 2014) (reliance on binding precedent negates exclusionary rule in some dog-sniff cases)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (2011) (objective reasonableness in relying on binding appellate precedent)
- United States v. Hunter, 770 F.3d 740 (8th Cir. 2014) (Jardines-like concerns pre-date Jardines but rely on binding precedent)
- United States v. Givens, 763 F.3d 987 (8th Cir. 2014) (pre-Jardines sniff upheld under binding precedent)
- Florida v. Jardines, 133 S. Ct. 1409 (Supreme Court 2013) (dog sniffs around home constitute a search under Fourth Amendment)