United States v. Willie Evans, 958 F.3d 1102

Multiple 911 calls reported gunshots at Willie Evans’s home; officers arrived minutes later.
Evans’s girlfriend said Evans had threatened suicide; Evans initially refused to exit but then came out and locked the door; police handcuffed him and placed him in a squad car.
An officer heard sounds from inside described as footsteps and someone crying/whimpering; officers forced entry without a warrant to check for injured persons.
During a brief (4–5 minute) safety sweep officers saw firearms and dogs (the whimpering was later attributed to a dog); officers left, obtained a warrant, then conducted a full search recovering a rifle, three handguns, and ammunition.
Evans was indicted for being a felon in possession of firearms, moved to suppress evidence from the warrantless entry (denied), pleaded guilty preserving appeal, and also raised two sentencing challenges.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed: warrantless entry was reasonable under the emergency aid exigency; sentencing adjustments for a semiautomatic capable of accepting a large-capacity magazine and for an obliterated serial number were upheld.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Warrantless entry — emergency aid exception	Evans: police should have recognized whimper as a dog; entry unreasonable	Government: recent shots, 911 calls, threat of suicide, locked house, sounds inside gave objectively reasonable basis to fear injured person	Affirmed: entry reasonable under emergency aid exigency given totality of circumstances
2. Base offense level for semiautomatic capable of accepting large-capacity magazine	Evans: unloaded or unattached magazine means firearm not “capable” at time of offense	Government: “capable” is a possibility-based term; empty or nearby magazine satisfies guideline	Affirmed: guideline covers firearms capable of accepting such magazines regardless of loaded/attached status
3. Four-level enhancement for obliterated serial number	Evans: record lacks evidence tying the Ruger rifle at sentencing to the seized rifle	Government: Detective testified he seized/impounded the rifle; judge inspected rifle and found serial erased	Affirmed: sentencing court permissibly relied on testimony and inspection to find obliterated serial number

Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (warrantless entry justified to render emergency assistance or prevent imminent injury)
Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (2011) (exigent-circumstances standards for warrantless entries)
Michigan v. Fisher, 558 U.S. 45 (2009) (objective-reasonableness test for emergency aid entries)
Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1978) (warrantless searches permissible when exigencies make warrant impracticable)
United States v. Holloway, 290 F.3d 1331 (11th Cir. 2002) (similar facts — 911 shots justified warrantless sweep)
United States v. Timmann, 741 F.3d 1170 (11th Cir. 2013) (distinguishing stale or non-urgent incidents for exigency)
United States v. Davis, 668 F.3d 576 (8th Cir. 2012) (interpreting guideline language on magazines and proximity)
Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993) (Guidelines commentary is authoritative absent conflict)
United States v. Wilson, 884 F.2d 1355 (11th Cir. 1989) (permissible bases for sentencing findings)