United States v. Jones

• Decision Date: 29 March 2023
• Docket Number: CR422-133
• Parties: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. TERRAN L. JONES, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia

1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. TERRAN L. JONES, Defendant.

No. CR422-133

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division

March 29, 2023

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CHRISTOPHER L. RAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Defendant Terran L. Jones is charged with one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C § 922(g)(3)^[1], one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Doc. 1 (Indictment). He moves to suppress evidence seized from his house pursuant to a search warrant. Doc. 27. The Government responded in opposition. Doc. 37. The Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 28, 2023. Doc. 46 (Minute Entry). The motion is ripe for disposition.

I. BACKGROUND

On April 6, 2022, Special Agent Catherine Balzer^[2] with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) applied for a search warrant for Defendant Jones' apartment and vehicle. See doc. 46-2 at 1. She supported her request for a warrant with an affidavit detailing her investigation into Jones' suspicious pattern of firearm purchases. Id. at 2-16. That affidavit detailed her experience and training, id. at 3, and conveyed her belief that “there is probable cause to believe that Terran Jones . . . committed federal firearm crimes, including possessing a firearm while being an unlawful user of controlled substance in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(3),” id. at 4. It further conveyed her belief that “[t]here is also probable cause to believe that [Terran Jones] committed violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(a)(6), which prohibits any person from knowingly making false statements in the acquisition or attempted acquisition of a firearm.” Id. at 5.

According to Balzer's affidavit, on March 16, 2022, ATF agents received information that Jones had purchased a large number of firearms from two licensed firearm dealers, or “FFLs”, over a relatively short period of time. Doc. 46-2 at 7. After receiving that information, Balzer retrieved copies of Jones' completed “Firearm Transaction Record forms,” or “ATF 4473 forms,” from one of the FFLs. Id. at 7. The ATF 4473 form requires a purchaser to “truthfully answer a series of questions” designed to “identify whether a potential buyer is prohibited from possessing a firearm, and whether the firearm is truly being purchased for the buyer and not someone else.” Id. at 5-6. Each of Jones' forms indicated that Jones was purchasing the firearms for himself, that he was not a drug user or a drug addict, and that his address was 1303 Veterans Parkway, Apartment 409, Hinesville, Georgia. Id. at 7.

Balzer's affidavit specifically identifies twenty-six firearms purchased by Jones between March 23, 2019, and March 22, 2022.^[3] Doc. 46-2 at 9-12. On March 23, 2019, he purchased a pistol. Id. at 9. On July 6, 2020, he purchased another pistol. Id. On July 13, 2020, he purchased a shotgun. Id. On July 2, 2021, he purchased two pistols. Id. On February 14, 2022, he purchased five pistols. Id. at 9-10. On February 21, 2022, he purchased five pistols and one rifle. Id. at 10. On March 4, 2022, he purchased a pistol. Id. at 11. On March 12, 2022, he purchased a pistol and a rifle. Id. On March 14, 2022, he purchased six pistols. Id. at 11-12. On March 16, 2022,^[4] he purchased a pistol. Id. at 12. Jones bought twenty-one of the firearms from Gold and Silver Pawn, and the other five from Aim Center Mass. Id. at 9-12. Gold and Silver Pawn and Aim Center Mass. are both FFLs, located less than three miles apart. Id. at 7.

An employee from Gold and Silver Pawn provided Balzer with a photograph of a vehicle and informed Balzer that on February 21, 2022, Jones “drove the vehicle to the store and used the vehicle to transport the firearms that he purchased away from the store.” Doc. 46-2 at 7-8. Balzer queried the vehicle's license tag through the National Crime Information Center and identified it as registered to the defendant at 1303 Veterans Parkway, Apartment 409, Hinesville, Georgia, the same address from Jones' ATF 4473 forms. Id. On March 21, 2022, Agents conducted surveillance at the apartment complex located at 1303 Veterans Parkway and identified Jones' vehicle “backed into a parking space near apartment 409.” Id. at 8.

Balzer's affidavit also explains that further investigation into Jones, a United States Army Service member, revealed that on two occasions Jones' urine tested positive for marijuana use. Doc. 46-2 at 12. A report from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigative Division (“CID”) noted that Jones tested positive for the active component in marijuana on January 24, 2019, and that Jones “admitted he smoked [m]arijuana while on leave in Roanoke, FL.” Id. A second report noted Jones' urine again tested positive for an active component in marijuana on January 27, 2022. Id. at 13. Balzer also discovered that as of March 1, 2022, Jones was listed as an unlawful controlled substance user in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Id. at 14.

Balzer's affidavit summarized:

Based on the foregoing, my investigation revealed that JONES purchased twenty-six (26) firearms since the first time his urine tested positive for marijuana on January 24, 2019. Furthermore, he purchased five (5) firearms on February 14, 2022, a mere 18 days after his January 27, 2022 positive urinalysis. He purchased six (6) more firearms on February 21, 2022, only 25 days after that same urinalysis. JONES has purchased a total of twenty-one (21) firearms since he tested positive on January 27, 2022. JONES purchased two AR-15 style rifles, one AK-47 style rife, eight Glocks pistols, nine Taurus' pistols, and one Canik pistol.

Doc. 46-2 at 13. It also referred to an opinion of an ATF Senior Special Agent that the firearms at issue “were manufactured outside of the State of Georgia and affected interstate commerce.” Id. at 13-14.

Magistrate Judge Benjamin Cheesbro found probable cause to search Jones' vehicle and apartment and issued the requested warrant on April 6, 2022. See doc. 46-3 at 1. Agents executed the warrant on April 14, 2022. Doc. 46-4 at 1. The search of Jones' apartment resulted in the seizure of, among other things, suspected marijuana, suspected drug paraphernalia, ammunition, receipts, and three pistols. Id. Defendant challenges the search warrant authorizing the search of his apartment, arguing no probable cause existed to search his residence, any probable cause that might have existed was stale when the warrant issued, and the ATF agent's reliance on the warrant was not in good faith. Doc. 27 at 8-9.

II. ANALYSIS

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures....” U.S. Const. Amend. IV. As Defendant notes, “the physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the working of the Fourth Amendment is directed.” Doc. 27 at 5 (quoting Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 58586 (1980)) (internal quotation marks omitted). But as the Supreme Court continued in Payton, “we have long adhered to the view that the warrant procedure minimizes the danger of needless intrusions of that sort.” 445 U.S. at 586. Under the Fourth Amendment “no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause ....” U.S. Const. Amend. IV.

Probable cause exists, and therefore a search warrant may issue, where the affidavit supporting the warrant application establishes “a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.” Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983); see also United States v. Brundidge, 170 F.3d 1350, 1352 (11th Cir. 1999). A court must consider the totality of the evidence in determining whether probable cause exists to justify the issuance of a search warrant, and that determination turns on the “assessment of probabilities in particular factual contexts....” Gates, 462 U.S. at 232. It is the task of a reviewing court to determine whether the issuing judge had a “substantial basis” for finding probable cause. Id. at 238-39. The issuing magistrate's determination is accorded “great deference.” United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 914 (1984); see also Brundidge, 170 F.3d at 1352 (discussing “great deference” afforded a judge's determination of probable cause). Because search warrants are presumed to be validly issued, a defendant seeking suppression of evidence seized during a search conducted pursuant to a warrant bears the burden of establishing that the warrant was defective. See United States v. Bushay, 859 F.Supp.2d 1335, 1377 (N.D.Ga. 2012) (citing Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 171 (1978); United States v. Van Horn, 789 F.2d 1492, 1500 (11th Cir. 1986); United States v. Marx, 635 F.2d 436, 441 (5th Cir. 1981); and United States v. Osborne, 630 F.2d 374, 377 (5th Cir. 1980)).

Jones first argues the agent's affidavit did not contain evidence sufficient to establish probable cause to search his home. Doc. 27 at 9. An affidavit seeking a search warrant for a residence need not contain “an allegation that the illegal activity occurred at the location,” United States v. Kapordelis, 569 F.3d 1291, 1310 (11th Cir. 2009), but it “should establish a connection between the defendant and the residence to be searched and a link between the residence and any criminal activity,” United States v. Mitchell, 503 Fed.Appx. 751, 754 (11th Cir. 2013) (quoting United States v. Martin, 297 F.3d 1308, 1314 (11th Cir. 2002)) (internal quotations omitted). “[T]he affidavit must supply the authorizing...