United States v. Zamudio
909 F.3d 172
7th Cir.2018Background
- FBI investigated Indianapolis drug trafficking via wiretaps of multiple phones; intercepted calls between Jose Zamudio (ringleader) and his brother Juan Zamudio.
- FBI agent Tim Bates prepared an 84-page affidavit and obtained a magistrate's warrant to search 34 locations, including Juan Zamudio’s residence at 64 N. Tremont Street.
- Affidavit described three specific events tying Juan to drug transactions (Kroger meeting with purchaser, coordination with others after a delivery, and phone call about shipments) and noted he lived at the Tremont address and parked his vehicle there.
- The affidavit lacked any direct evidence that drug activity occurred inside the Tremont residence; instead it relied on agent's training-based assertions that traffickers commonly store drugs, records, money, and firearms at their homes.
- District court granted Zamudio’s motion to suppress the items seized at the home for lack of a sufficient nexus; the government appealed.
- Seventh Circuit reversed, holding the affidavit gave a magistrate a fair probability that evidence would be found at the residence, so probable cause supported the warrant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether affidavit established probable cause to search Zamudio's home | Government: affidavit and agent's experience create reasonable inference evidence likely at residence | Zamudio: no specific evidence linking criminal activity to the home; insufficient nexus | Reversed: magistrate could reasonably infer fair probability evidence at home; probable cause existed |
| Whether direct evidence linking crime to place is required for a warrant | Government: not required; reasonable inferences suffice given nature of drug evidence | Zamudio: absence of direct evidence at residence defeats probable cause | Held: direct evidence unnecessary; courts may infer where drug evidence likely to be found |
| Whether agent's training/experience assertions can supply nexus | Government: agent's extensive experience entitled to weight in probable-cause analysis | Zamudio: reliance on generic training-based statements insufficient | Held: agent's experience and factual showing (residence, utilities, vehicle) supported inference |
| Whether name transposition in affidavit invalidates warrant | Government: errors were not outcome-determinative | Zamudio: district court cited name confusion in part | Held: occasional name switching did not undermine material facts or probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause assessed by totality-of-circumstances; fair probability standard)
- United States v. Lamon, 930 F.2d 1183 (7th Cir. 1991) (evidence of drug dealing is likely to be found at dealer's residence)
- United States v. Orozco, 576 F.3d 745 (7th Cir. 2009) (magistrate may credit experienced agent's inference that evidence will be at defendant's home)
- United States v. Aljabari, 626 F.3d 940 (7th Cir. 2010) (direct evidence linking crime to place not essential for probable cause)
- United States v. Correa, 908 F.3d 208 (7th Cir. 2018) (probable cause to arrest may support probable cause to search residence)