After sentencing, defendant
missed his turn in date in New Jersey.
He was found in New Mexico in his son’s Ford Mustang. Over the course of five days, agents from two
different agencies searched the car multiple times and eventually found a
firearm magazine clip under the driver’s seat and a gun in a bag that was in
the car – all without getting a warrant.
District court suppressed the evidence saying that there was no probable
cause to search the car. The Circuit
reversed.
Although
there were numerous arguments the government could have raised, it only argued
on appeal that probable cause existed and therefore no warrant was necessary. Circuit agreed, stating that a search is justified
whenever there is PC that evidence of a crime, not just contraband, is in the
car – even if that evidence may otherwise seem innocuous. Also, the continuing or completed nature of a
crime is irrelevant to the PC analysis in this case. It didn’t matter that defendant had already
failed to report to prison and that he had already been arrested – there was
still PC that evidence of his deliberate failure to report (such as false IDs)
would be in the car. Finally, it didn’t
matter that the first agent who searched the car wouldn’t have done so of his own
accord and only performed the search upon the request of another agent. Probable cause is an objective inquiry and
does not rise and fall on the subjective belief of the searching officer.
More
important than its probable cause conclusion were two statements by the
Circuit:
First, if the search of the car
is justified by probable cause, then law enforcement can search every part of
the car including any contents that may conceal the object of the search (?!?!). Because there was probable cause to search
this car, the agents were allowed to go into any bag or suitcase inside the
car.
Second, probable cause does not
dissipate after the car is immobilized because there is no exigency component
to the automobile exception (again--?!?!).
Therefore, it did not matter that the government had the car for several
days and could have easily gotten a warrant.
On top of that, the government was allowed to search the car as many
times as it wanted.
Bottom
line, as long as law enforcement had PC to search the car when they seized it, they
could search everything inside it, for as long as they wanted to, as many times
as they wanted to.
There are
some limitations (barely). (1) The Circuit deliberately stated that this case
did not concern a situation in which the car is NOT in continuous control of
law enforcement. (2) There must be probable
cause that contraband and/or affirmative evidence of a crime will be
found. The Circuit rejected the
government’s argument that a search is permissible if there is PC that a search
would reveal evidence refuting a potential affirmative defense. (3)
Even though prison inmates and escaped prisoners generally have no legitimate
expectations of privacy, the Circuit deliberately did not address whether a
fugitive – one who failed to report to prison -- has a legitimate expectation
of privacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.