945 F.3d 498
6th Cir.2019Background
- Monroe County officers went to William Wooden’s home looking for fugitive Ben Harrelson; Investigator Conway Mason (plainclothes) knocked and asked to speak with occupant Janet Harris and to come inside to warm up.
- The district court credited the officer’s testimony that Wooden consented to Mason entering; Mason and another officer then observed Wooden pick up a rifle, detained and searched him, and found additional firearms and ammunition.
- Wooden was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession), moved to suppress evidence as the entry/search lacked a warrant and valid consent, and was convicted after the district court denied suppression.
- The PSR designated Wooden an Armed Career Criminal under the ACCA based on prior Georgia convictions: a 1989 aggravated assault, ten burglaries in 1997, and a 2005 burglary; Wooden objected that Georgia burglary did not qualify and that the ten 1997 burglaries arose from a single occasion.
- The district court ruled that Wooden consented to entry, that Mason’s plainclothes status did not invalidate consent, and that each of the ten 1997 burglary convictions counted as separate ACCA predicates; Wooden appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Wooden's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Validity of consent to enter home | Wooden: did not consent to Mason entering | Govt: Wooden consented; district court credibility finding should stand | Consent found; denial of suppression affirmed (deferential review to district court credibility) |
| 2) Consent vitiated by deception (plainclothes/failed ID) | Wooden: Mason’s undercover status and silence was deceptive, so consent invalid | Govt: plainclothes/failed ID is not deception; no affirmative misrepresentation | Claim forfeited/not preserved; court reviewed for plain error and rejected the claim |
| 3) ACCA: whether ten 1997 burglaries are separate "occasions" | Wooden: the ten convictions arose from a single occasion and should count as one predicate | Govt: each entry into a different mini-warehouse is a separate burglary/occasion | Each 1997 burglary counts separately under Hill factors; ACCA classification affirmed |
| 4) Rehaif claim (knowledge of felon status) | Wooden: jury instruction omitted element that he knew his felon status | Govt: claim was forfeited by failure to raise in opening brief; Rehaif was foreseeable | Claim forfeited; not considered on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980) (Fourth Amendment draws a firm line at the entrance to the home)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973) (consent to search is valid if freely and voluntarily given)
- United States v. Hill, 440 F.3d 292 (6th Cir. 2006) (factors to assess whether offenses were committed on different occasions)
- United States v. Baldwin, 621 F.2d 251 (6th Cir. 1980) (undercover/officer not in uniform generally does not constitute deceptive misrepresentation)
- Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (knowledge of prohibited status is an element of § 922(g) offense)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (documents in the record may be used to determine the nature of a prior guilty plea)
- United States v. Paige, 634 F.3d 871 (6th Cir. 2011) (discussion of different-occasions analysis)
- United States v. Jenkins, 770 F.3d 507 (6th Cir. 2014) (treating Hill factors as informative standards rather than rigid rules)