United States v. Brinkley

• Decision Date: 13 November 2020
• Docket Number: No. 18-4455,18-4455
• Citation: 980 F.3d 377
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Kendrick BRINKLEY, Defendant - Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

980 F.3d 377

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.Kendrick BRINKLEY, Defendant - Appellant.

No. 18-4455

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued: January 31, 2020

Decided: November 13, 2020

ARGUED: John Parke Davis, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Anthony Martinez, Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. R. Andrew Murray, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

Reversed, vacated, and remanded by published opinion. Judge Motz wrote the opinion, in which Chief Judge Gregory joined. Judge Richardson wrote a dissenting opinion.

DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge:

To execute an arrest warrant for Kendrick Brinkley, police officers entered a private home. They had neither consent to do so nor a search warrant. Brinkley appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained in the home, arguing that the officers lacked the necessary reason to believe both that he (1) resided in the home and (2) would be present when they entered. We agree and so must reverse.

I.

In February 2017, a federal-state task force in Charlotte, North Carolina, sought to execute outstanding arrest warrants. J.A. 113. Brinkley, then subject to an arrest warrant for unlawfully possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, was among the targets. J.A. 111.

A.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) Special Agent Jason Murphy oversaw the operation. J.A. 110–11. An ATF analyst first provided Agent Murphy with at least two possible addresses. J.A. 125. Because a water bill for one of these addresses was in Brinkley's name, Agent Murphy initially believed that address was Brinkley's most likely residence. J.A. 125–26. One of the other addresses that the analyst provided was an apartment on Stoney Trace Drive in Mint Hill, North Carolina, J.A. 64, 125–26; no utility bill in Brinkley's name was associated with this address, J.A. 125.

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department Detective Robert Stark, a member of Agent Murphy's task force, also tried to locate Brinkley. J.A. 63–64, 110–11, 125. On February 2, Detective Stark searched for Brinkley on CJLEADS, a North Carolina statewide law enforcement database.¹ J.A. 64. Detective Stark found multiple addresses in the database linked to Brinkley. J.A. 64–66, 154. Two CJLEADS entries — one for a traffic citation, added January 2, J.A. 155–56, and another from the state department of corrections, added "at some point in January" — were associated with the Stoney Trace apartment, J.A. 64–65, 68.

But other CJLEADS entries that Detective Stark found placed Brinkley at numerous other addresses. J.A. 74, 87. One entry, added five days before the January 2 traffic citation, provided an address on Planters View Drive. J.A. 88, 154. Another entry, added a month before that, gave an address on Stone Post Road in Charlotte. J.A. 88, 154. Older entries, including at least five more from the same year, and others dating further back, listed the Planters View Drive address and still other addresses. J.A. 74, 154. Detective Stark did not look into the Planters View Drive address or any of these other addresses. Rather, "based on the length of time that those addresses had been associated with" Brinkley, Detective Stark believed that they "were probably family addresses" where Brinkley did not reside. J.A. 89. But the detective intended to check these other addresses if Brinkley was not found at the Stoney Trace apartment. J.A. 89.

Detective Stark then found Brinkley's public Facebook page. J.A. 72–73. Posts and photos there led him to believe that Brinkley was dating one Brittany Chisholm. J.A. 73. Detective Stark searched for Chisholm on CJLEADS and found that she was also associated with the Stoney Trace apartment. J.A. 73–74. Based on this information, Detective Stark concluded that Brinkley lived there with Chisholm. J.A. 75.

Detective Stark reported his conclusion to Agent Murphy, who came to agree that Brinkley probably resided in the Stoney Trace apartment. J.A. 111–12, 126. Neither officer was certain that they had uncovered Brinkley's address. J.A. 112, 126. Rather, in Agent Murphy's experience, it was "common for someone like Mr. Brinkley ... to have more than one place where they will stay the night." J.A. 126.

The next day, Agent Murphy, Detective Stark, and three other police officers went to the Stoney Trace apartment to conduct what both Agent Murphy and Detective Stark characterized as a "knock-and-talk" to "start [their] search for Mr. Brinkley." J.A. 75–76, 113, 126–27. The officers intended to "interview the occupants to find out if [he] was indeed there," and to arrest him if he was. J.A. 75, 113. Agent Murphy acknowledged that he "had no idea if [Brinkley] was going to be there that morning," but thought the Stoney Trace apartment was the "most likely address" to "find Mr. Brinkley or evidence of his whereabouts." J.A. 134.

B.

The five officers arrived at the Stoney Trace apartment around 8:30 AM on Friday, February 3, all wearing clothing identifying themselves as police officers. J.A. 75–77, 91. In Agent Murphy's words, they intended "to basically secure the area and sit up on the house and wait to see if Mr. Brinkley left." J.A. 134. Detective Stark knocked on the front door, and the officers heard movement inside for about a minute. J.A. 77. A woman asked who was there, and Detective Stark answered that it was the police. J.A. 77. The officers heard movement for another minute until Chisholm, wearing pajamas, slowly opened the door. J.A. 77, 114.

Detective Stark informed Chisholm that the officers were looking for Brinkley and asked to enter the apartment. J.A. 96. Chisholm denied that Brinkley was there. J.A. 78, 96, 115, 128. According to Detective Stark, Chisholm grew "very nervous"; her "body tensed" and her "breathing quickened," and she looked back over her shoulder into the apartment. J.A. 78. The officers saw another woman they did not recognize, but later identified as Jermica Prigon, wearing pajamas and folding clothes in the living room. J.A. 79, 97, 116. The officers heard movement coming from a room in the back of the apartment, and both Chisholm and Prigon repeatedly looked back toward that area. J.A. 78–80, 115–16.

Detective Stark again asked if Brinkley was present and if the officers could enter to look for him. J.A. 79, 115. He explained that the police "had information that [Brinkley] was staying at this residence" and "asked for [Chisholm's] permission ... to come through and just do a walk through to make sure that he was indeed not at the residence." J.A. 115. Chisholm, still seeming nervous, answered that she did not want the police officers to enter her apartment and asked if they had a search warrant authorizing them to do so. J.A. 79, 115.

Detective Stark estimated the entire exchange with Chisholm lasted "a little more than a minute"; Agent Murphy thought it lasted more than three. J.A. 96–97, 129. Both testified that based on Chisholm's demeanor and behavior, Prigon's presence, the movement they heard in the back of the apartment, and the morning hour (8:30 AM), they believed Brinkley was inside. J.A. 81, 117, 133. Agent Murphy testified that the sounds and the women's reactions led him to believe "100 percent that Mr. Brinkley was hiding in the apartment." J.A. 134.

At this point, the officers decided not to follow the original plan to secure the area and wait to see if Brinkley left the home. J.A. 134. Instead, Agent Murphy told Chisholm that he believed she was hiding Brinkley and that the officers were going to enter the apartment to serve an arrest warrant on him. J.A. 81, 117. Then the five uniformed and armed officers entered the apartment. J.A. 99. Detective Stark recalled that he probably entered with his gun drawn; Agent Murphy believed that he did not draw his weapon at this time. J.A. 81, 117. The officers found Brinkley in a bedroom. J.A. 82, 99, 118. They arrested and handcuffed him. J.A. 82, 99, 118.

The officers conducted a protective sweep to check for others hiding in the apartment. J.A. 82, 99, 119. They did not find anyone else but did see digital scales, a plastic baggie containing cocaine base, and a bullet. J.A. 83, 105, 119–20, 131. Chisholm then gave but subsequently revoked verbal consent to search the apartment, so the officers obtained a search warrant, pursuant to which they seized three firearms and magazines. J.A. 83–86, 108–09, 120–23, 159.

C.

A grand jury indicted Brinkley on two felon-in-possession charges under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), one charge of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and one charge of firearm possession in furtherance of a drug offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). J.A. 8–10. Brinkley moved to suppress the evidence police obtained after entering the Stoney Trace apartment. J.A. 12–15. He denied that he resided in the apartment and explained that he was staying there as Chisholm's overnight guest.² J.A. 13, 20. Brinkley argued that when the officers entered the apartment, they lacked reason to believe that he (1) resided in the apartment or (2) would be present there at that time. J.A. 19–23. The district court denied the motion. J.A. 144.

Brinkley entered an unconditional guilty plea to one felon-in-possession charge, the predicate for the arrest warrant. He entered a conditional guilty plea to two other charges arising from the search of the home, reserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling. J.A. 220. The district court sentenced Brinkley to 84 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release on each count, to run concurrently. J.A. 206, 208. Brinkley timely...