United States v. Travis Barnes, 895 F.3d 1194

Police in Yakima, WA circulated warrants for Travis Barnes (misdemeanor bench warrant for failure to appear on a trip-permit violation) and his son; officers later recognized Barnes by a neck tattoo, attempted to arrest him, and he fled.
Deputy tasered Barnes after he ignored orders to stop; officers handcuffed and searched him and found a .22 pistol in his pocket; Barnes, a felon, was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
The underlying municipal probable-cause finding was recorded on a criminal complaint by a judge who initialed “Yes” to probable cause, but the record lacked evidence the judge reviewed the officer’s sworn citation or affidavit.
At suppression hearing the district court assumed the judge reviewed the citation and applied the Leon good-faith exception to deny suppression; the Ninth Circuit found that factual assumption clearly erroneous and concluded the warrant resulted from judicial abandonment.
Separately, Barnes sought to present a necessity defense (he claimed he picked up the gun to dispose of it because children were present); the district court barred the defense as the offer of proof failed to show imminent threat or lack of reasonable legal alternatives.
Barnes was convicted, sentenced to 41 months, and appealed; the Ninth Circuit affirmed—suppressible warrant but officers reasonably relied on it, and necessity defense was properly excluded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of arrest warrant / judicial abandonment	Barnes: municipal judge issued probable-cause finding without reviewing officer affidavit, so warrant invalid (judicial abandonment).	Government: signed complaint shows judicial probable-cause determination; warrant valid.	Court: Judge likely did not review citation; warrant infirm and judicial abandonment shown.
Applicability of Leon good-faith exception	Barnes: exception inapplicable because judge abandoned role, so evidence must be suppressed.	Government: officers reasonably relied on existing bench warrant; they had no reason to know of abandonment, so Leon protects admission.	Court: Good-faith exception applies; officers lacked notice of abandonment, so suppression not required.
Burden to prove judicial abandonment	Barnes: preponderance showing that judge failed to review materials suffices.	Government: absence of direct evidence that judge failed to review should defeat abandonment claim.	Court: Preponderance met; evidence supports finding judge didn’t review materials.
Admissibility of necessity defense	Barnes: took gun to dispose to prevent harm to children—necessity/justification defense admissible.	Government: proffer insufficient to show imminent harm or no legal alternatives.	Court: Offer of proof failed to establish imminent threat or lack of alternatives; necessity properly excluded.

United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (establishes good-faith exception to exclusionary rule and identifies judicial-abandonment carve-out)
Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975) (magistrate must make independent probable-cause determination)
Whiteley v. Warden, Wyo. State Penitentiary, 401 U.S. 560 (1971) (complaint alone cannot substitute for magistrate’s independent judgment)
Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York, 442 U.S. 319 (1979) (example of judicial participation in search operations amounting to abandonment)
Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964) (magistrate must be informed of underlying circumstances supporting probable cause)
Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (1995) (clerical errors by court employees generally do not warrant suppression)
Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009) (exclusionary rule’s deterrence rationale limits suppression for isolated negligence)
United States v. Jordan, 291 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. 2002) (defendant bears burden by preponderance to show warrant infirmity)