United States v. Perry
Decision Date | 19 July 2017 |
Docket Number | No. 16-6285,16-6285 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Laquinton PERRY, Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
ON BRIEF: John Keith Perry, Jr., PERRY–GRIFFIN, P.C., Southaven, Mississippi, for Appellant. Lauren J. Delery, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellee.
Before: ROGERS, COOK, and STRANCH, Circuit Judges.
Laquinton Perry, having conditionally pled guilty to conspiring to possess narcotics with intent to distribute, appeals the preserved evidentiary issue of whether a search warrant for Perry's apartment was supported by probable cause. Perry contends that the activities indicating drug sales that were observed over the seven weeks before the issuance of the search warrant were stale evidence because the activities were not individually dated. The observations, according to Perry, may have been too old to indicate that drug evidence would probably be found in the apartment, while at the same time not concentrated or old enough to indicate continuous or entrenched criminal activity. Even without specific dates, however, the amount of suspicious activity observed within the seven weeks in connection with Perry's apartment was enough to support probable cause in this case.
At the probable cause hearing in Tennessee state court, Lieutenant Jason Drewery of the Fayette County Sheriff's Department swore in an affidavit as follows:
Based on that affidavit, the Tennessee magistrate issued a search warrant on December 5, 2014, two days after Lt. Drewery's surveillance ended. Lt. Drewery executed the warrant on December 9.
Because Lt. Drewery's affidavit detailed multiple transactions involving Perry and his girlfriend that appeared to be drug transactions, and because those transactions corroborated the neighbors' complaints that Perry and his girlfriend were selling drugs, the Tennessee magistrate properly issued the search warrant under the Fourth Amendment.1 Lt. Drewery's affidavit provided the Tennessee magistrate with the requisite substantial basis for finding a fair probability that illegal drugs would be found in apartment four and in the Chevrolet Impala.
Even though Lt. Drewery did not specify in his affidavit the dates on which he observed particular transactions, and while "stale information cannot be used in a probable cause determination," United States v. Frechette , 583 F.3d 374, 377 (6th Cir. 2009), Lt. Drewery's observations were not stale for two reasons. First, Lt. Drewery did state that his observations occurred between October 15 and December 3—two to fifty-one days before the probable-cause determination.
While "drugs are usually sold and consumed in a prompt fashion," id. at 378, the evidence of drug sales two to fifty-one days before is recent enough here to suggest that there may be further evidence of illegality in that place. In United States v. Greene , 250 F.3d 471, 480–81 (6th Cir. 2001), for instance, we held that 23–month–old evidence of drug sales was not stale when paired with information regarding a drug delivery in the prior month. Second, Lt. Drewery's observations of heavy car and foot traffic, repeated transactions, and one particular transaction in which an unknown man from apartment four took out a packet of marijuana from a bigger bag, all suggested that apartment four was home to an ongoing drug business of some size. We have recognized a "general principle that when ‘the affidavit properly recites facts indicating activity of a protracted and continuous nature, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Christian
...trafficking, the evidence was not stale."[S]tale information cannot be used in a probable cause determination." United States v. Perry , 864 F.3d 412, 414 (6th Cir. 2017) (quoting United States v. Frechette , 583 F.3d 374, 377 (6th Cir. 2009) ); see also United States v. Harris , 255 F.3d 2......
-
United States v. Christian
...the assertions in an affidavit but to ask whether the magistrate had a substantial basis for his conclusion, United States v. Perry , 864 F.3d 412, 415 (6th Cir. 2017), the later phrase in the affidavit cannot be read out of existence. Rather, the deferential nature of our review means that......
-
United States v. Mills
...26, 2016). Again, the Court disagrees."[S]tale information cannot be used in a probable cause determination." United States v. Perry, 864 F.3d 412, 414-415 (6th Cir. 2017). Because "drugs are usually sold and consumed in a prompt fashion," United States v. Frechette, 583 F.3d 374, 378 (6th ......
-
United States v. Molina
...the totality of the circumstances, that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.’ " United States v. Perry , 864 F.3d 412, 415 (6th Cir. 2017) (quoting United States v. Brown , 732 F.3d 569, 573 (6th Cir. 2013) ). The Court's review is limited to considering wh......