402 F. App'x 378
10th Cir.2010Background
- ILP officer information linked Thompson to a robbery investigation and a possible stay with Letitia Harris at 4619 Creek Court.
- Sgt. McRorie believed Thompson’s residence could be 4619 Creek Court based on multiple reports and his street-level experience with gang members.
- An arrest warrant for Thompson was issued April 3, 2008 listing 2213 N. Kelham Avenue as his address.
- Police observed a green Escalade at 4619 Creek Court on April 3–4, 2008, consistent with Thompson’s associates’ reports.
- Arrest team entered 4619 Creek Court in the morning, found Thompson in a bedroom asleep, and recovered a loaded gun and marijuana.
- Thompson was indicted in September 2008; he moved to suppress the seized evidence, which the district court denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Payton applies to enter a suspect’s home under an arrest warrant | Thompson argues Steagald governs because the residence is shared. | The officers reasonably believed Thompson lived at the Creek Court home; Payton applies. | Payton applies; entry lawful under probable-cause warrant. |
| Whether officers had reasonable belief Thompson lived at 4619 Creek Court | Evidence insufficient to prove residence at Creek Court. | Officers had reasonable belief due to Thompson’s staying with Harris and corroborating indicators. | Reasonable belief Thompson lived or had significant relationship to Creek Court; Payton applies. |
| Whether Thompson was inside the residence at the time of entry | Presence could not be presumed from indirect indicators. | Factors like car presence and resident’s time support entry. | Officer belief Thompson was inside was reasonable; entry lawful under Payton. |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980) (arrest warrants implicitly carrylimited authority to enter suspect’s home where he is believed to be present)
- Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981) (cannot use arrest warrant to enter third-party home without a search warrant)
- Valdez v. McPheters, 172 F.3d 1220 (10th Cir. 1999) ( Payton/Steagald interplay when suspect has significant relationship to residence)
- United States v. Gay, 240 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2001) ( Payton two-prong test for residence belief and entry)
- United States v. Risse, 83 F.3d 212 (8th Cir. 1996) (supports interpretation of residence ownership/ownership signals)
- United States v. Litteral, 910 F.2d 547 (9th Cir. 1990) (address sharing and multi-residence considerations)