United States v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 13 July 2015 |
| Docket Number | Court File No. 15-cr-91(JNE/LIB) (1) |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Derrick Taylor, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
This matter comes before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge upon Defendant Derrick Taylor's ("Defendant") Motion to Suppress Search and Seizure, [Docket No. 27], and Motion to Suppress, Admissions, and Answers, [Docket No. 28]. This case has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for a report and recommendation, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.1. The Court held a motions hearing on June 12, 2015, regarding the parties' pretrial motions.1 The parties requested an opportunity to submit supplemental briefing which was completed and the motions to suppress then taken under advisement on June 26, 2015.
For reasons discussed herein, the Court recommends that Defendant's Motion to Suppress Search and Seizure, [Docket No. 27], and Motion to Suppress Statements, Admission, and Answers, [Docket No. 28], be DENIED.
Defendant is charged with one count of being an armed career criminal in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e).
The record presently before the Court indicates that, in December, 2013, Investigator Andrew Abrahamson of the Pine County Sheriff's Office made contact with a confidential informant (the "Hinckley CI") who told Investigator Abrahamson that Defendant and Kendall Taylor were selling marijuana and other controlled substances out of his residence located in Apartment A of a duplex with the address of 2485 Evergreen Court, in Hinckley, Minnesota ("the Hinckley residence"). (Gov't Ex. 1, 1). The Hinckley CI, who had previously provided information that had been corroborated, told Investigator Abrahamson that the Hinckley CI had seen large amounts of marijuana in the Hinckley residence and had seen Defendant carrying a firearm on his person in the Hinckley residence. (Id. at 2).
In early January, 2014, Investigator Abrahamson directed the Hinckley CI to conduct a controlled buy of narcotics at the Hinckley residence. (Id.). The Hinckley CI met Kendall Taylor at the Hinckley residence, and, while being remotely monitored by law enforcement officers using an audio listening device, purchased marijuana from him. (Id.). At some point between January 8, 2014, and January 10, 2014, Investigator Abrahamson directed the Hinckley CI to conduct a second controlled buy of narcotics at the Hinckley residence. (Id.). The Hinckley CI again met with Kendall Taylor at the Hinckley residence and purchased marijuana from him. (Id.). Investigating officers again remotely monitored the transaction using an audio listening device. (Id.).
On January 10, 2014, Investigator Abrahamson applied for a warrant to search the persons of Kendall Taylor and Defendant, the Hinckley residence, and any and all vehicles located on the property. (Id. at 1). The Honorable James T. Reuter, District Judge for the Tenth Judicial District, State of Minnesota, determined that probable cause supported the issuance of the search warrant. (Id. at 4). Officer Abrahamson and other law enforcement officers executed the warrant to search the Hinckley residence on January 14, 2014. (Id. at 7).
In July or August of 2014, Officer James Burns of the Minneapolis Police Department received information from a confidential informant (the "Minneapolis CI") that a black male going by the street name of "Wood" was engaging in the illegal sale and distribution of large amounts of marijuana on the north side of Minneapolis. (Gov't Ex. 22, 2). The Minneapolis CI provided Officer Burns with a physical description of "Wood." (Id.). The Minneapolis CI, whom Officer Burns indicated had previously provided reliable, corroborated information in the past, told Officer Burns that "Wood" possibly lived in the southeast area of Minneapolis, used a blue suburban in his sale and distribution of narcotics, and used two different addresses on the north side of Minneapolis to store large quantities of marijuana and firearms. (Id.).
Officer Burns reviewed Minneapolis police reports and learned that Defendant had been documented as using the street name "Wood" in relation to an earlier narcotics search warrant in 2001. (Id.). Officer Burns believed that Defendant also matched the physical description of "Wood" given by the Minneapolis CI. (Id.). He also learned that Defendant was the registered owner of a blue 2001 Chevrolet suburban bearing Minnesota license plate 115-AKW ("blue2001 suburban"), and that Defendant had been stopped on July 5, 2014, while driving that vehicle, during which marijuana was recovered from it. (Id.).
Officer Burns showed the Minneapolis CI Defendant's driver's license photograph, and the Minneapolis CI positively identified Defendant as "Wood." (Id.).
During the course of the investigation, law enforcement identified 1026 11th Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota (the "Minneapolis residence") as Defendant's residence. (Id.). Officers watching the Minneapolis residence had seen the blue 2001 suburban on the street and in the townhouse parking lot at various times of the day and had seen Defendant leave the Minneapolis residence using the blue 2001 suburban. (Id.).
At some time between August 12, 2014, and August 15, 2014, Officer Burns directed the Minneapolis CI to conduct a controlled buy of marijuana from Defendant. (Id. at 3). The Minneapolis CI made contact with Defendant and was directed to a pre-determined meeting site. (Id.). Officers conducting surveillance of Defendant's Minneapolis residence then observed as Defendant exited the Minneapolis residence and drove the blue 2001 suburban to a separate house located at 1914 Oliver Avenue North, in Minneapolis, Minnesota ("Oliver Avenue house"). (Id.). Officers observed as Defendant entered the Oliver Avenue house by the front entrance and then departed a short time later. (Id.). Defendant, while still being observed by officers, then drove to the pre-determined location to meet the Minneapolis CI, where Defendant sold the Minneapolis CI a quantity of marijuana. (Id.).
On August 15, 2014, Officer Burns applied for warrants to search Defendant's person, Defendant's Minneapolis residence at 1026 11th Avenue Southeast, and the blue 2001 suburban. (Id. at 1-4). That same day, the Honorable Phillip C. Caruthers, District Judge for the FourthJudicial District, State of Minnesota, determined that probable cause supported the issuance of the search warrants. (Id. at 6).
On August 20, 2014, law enforcement officers executed the August 15, 2014, warrants. (June 12, 2015, Motions Hearing, Digital Recording at 2:36:00 p.m.).3
On August 20, 2014, while executing the August 15, 2014, warrants, the officers stopped Defendant as he was returning to the Minneapolis residence in the blue 2001 suburban. (Id. at 2:36:30 p.m., 2:40:50 p.m.). The officers arrested Defendant, handcuffed him, placed him in a squad car, and transported Defendant to a local office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") to be interviewed. (Id. at 2:36:50 p.m.; 2:41:10 p.m.). The arresting officers did not question Defendant at the scene of his arrest. (Id. at 2:36:45 p.m.).
At the FBI office, Defendant was directed into an interview room. (See generally, Government's Ex. 3). For several minutes after Defendant was initially placed in the interview room, Officer Burns first asked Defendant a number of questions regarding his identifying information. (Id. at 7:40-11:00). Approximately twelve minutes after Defendant was placed into the interview room, Officer Burns read Defendant the Miranda warnings. (Id. at 11:50-12:10). When asked, Defendant indicated that he had understood the Miranda warnings. (Id. at 12:10).
At several points during the post-Miranda interview, Defendant admitted that there were bullets in the Minneapolis residence. (Id. at 15:20-15:45, 20:10). Defendant told Officer Burns that the bullets had been left in Defendant's vehicle and where the bullets could be found in the Minneapolis residence. (Id. at 15:20-15:45). Defendant was ultimately released following the interview.
Defendant moves the Court to suppress all evidence gathered as a result of the executions of the January 10, 2014, warrant to search the Hinckley residence at 2485 Evergreen Court and the August 15, 2014, warrant to search the Minneapolis residence at 1026 11th Avenue Southeast. In his memorandum in support of his motion, Defendant indicated that his challenge to the January 14, 2014, warrant is limited to a "four corners" review of the sufficiency of the probable cause supporting the warrant. Defendant also challenges the probable cause supporting the August 15, 2014, warrant to search his Minneapolis residence, arguing that the information contained in Officer Burns' affidavit in support of the search warrant failed to establish a nexus between Defendant's sale of marijuana and the Minneapolis residence and, in any event, the August 15, 2014, warrant to search Defendant's Minneapolis residence was stale by the time the officers executed the warrant on August 20, 2014.
The Fourth Amendment guarantees the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures," and that "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation." U.S. Const. Amend. IV. The Eighth Circuit has held that "[a]n affidavit establishes probable cause for a warrant if it sets forth sufficient facts to establish that there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of criminal activity will be found in the particular place to be searched." United States v. Mutschelknaus, 592 F.3d 826,...
To continue reading
Request your trial