United States v. Vincent
1:12-cr-00007
W.D.N.Y.Mar 11, 2013Background
- Government movant seeks revocation of Vincent's bail under 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b) based on three violations arising from a February 6, 2013 incident at 556 12th Street, Niagara Falls, NY.
- Niagara Falls Police executed a search warrant at the residence; four people were found inside, including Vincent and Carr, with Carr hiding a plastic bag later found to contain approximately seven grams of cocaine.
- Vincent admitted ownership of the cocaine only after Miranda warnings were given and after Carr volunteered information that she hid the bag for him.
- A loaded handgun was found in a different upstairs bedroom closet; it is unclear whose bedroom it was and whether Vincent had any privacy or ownership interest in that closet.
- Vincent challenges the evidence as to Carr, asserting automatic standing to suppress, while Government contends no standing or that evidence derived from Carr is admissible and attributable to Vincent.
- Court conducts a bail-violation analysis under 18 U.S.C. § 3148(b) and ultimately finds probable cause to believe a federal/state felony was committed while on bail, warrants detention, and dismisses one count (firearm) for lack of probable cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Vincent have standing to challenge Carr’s evidence? | Vincent has automatic standing to challenge Carr’s evidence. | Court should recognize standing in light of attribution of evidence to him. | No automatic standing; standing requires privacy interest in Carr's body or area searched. |
| Is there probable cause to revoke bail based on drug evidence? | Probable cause exists to believe Vincent possessed cocaine in violation of release conditions. | Evidence tied to Carr cannot be attributed to Vincent; standing defeats basis for probable cause. | Probable cause established based on Carr’s statements and ownership assertion after warnings; supports bail revocation. |
| Does the firearm evidence support bail revocation? | Firearm evidence indicates possession relevant to violations. | Firearm was found in another occupant’s bedroom; no link to Vincent. | Count Two dismissed for lack of probable cause; firearm evidence does not support detention finding. |
Key Cases Cited
- Salvucci v. United States, 448 U.S. 83 (1980) (rejects automatic standing for possession defendants)
- LaFontaine v. United States, 210 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2000) (presumption against release when felonies on bail; weighs factors)
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978) (ownership of seized item not enough for privacy interest)
- Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 (1960) (automatic standing rejected)
- Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 (1968) (exclusionary rule limits without standing; trial testimony concerns)
- York v. United States, 578 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir. 1978) (no standing to challenge search of co-defendant's body)
- Herbst v. United States, 641 F.2d 1161 (5th Cir. 1981) (lack of legitimate privacy interest in another’s body bars standing)
- Miller v. Miller, 382 F. Supp. 2d 350 (N.D.N.Y. 2005) (probable cause can arise from information computer hits; not always require direct evidence)