# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 2- 13 48

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Ry an Ch ris to ph er Lu m

pk in s, al so kn own as Da le E. Hubb ard

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __

App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t
fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Ju ne 13 , 20 12

Fil ed : Au gu st 6, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re LOKEN, GRUEND ER, an d B ENTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

GRUENDER, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Ry an Lum

pk in s ent ered a co nd it io na l pl ea of gui lt y to po ss es si on wit h in te nt

to di st rib ut e co cai ne ba se in vi ol a t i o n o f 21 U.S.C. § 84 1( a)(1 ), (b )(1 )(C) an d

po ss es si on of a fir earm in fu rth eran ce of a d ru g tra ffi ck in g cri m e in vi ol at io n of 18U.S.C. § 92 4( c). He no w ap pe al s th e de ni al by th e di st ric t co ur t o f h i s mo t i o n to 1

su pp res s evi de nc e ob ta in ed fro m a warra nt le ss sea rch of a ren ta l v eh ic le , as well as

th e di st ric t co ur t’s de te rm in at io n th at he is a care er of fen de r fo r pu rp os e s of th e

Uni te d S ta te s Se nt en ci ng Gui de li ne s. Fo r th e rea so ns di sc us se d b el ow, we af fir m

.

On t he aft ern oo n o f Feb ru ary 3, 2 01 1, two off ic ers of t he Kans as Cit y

Po li ce Dep art m en t pa tro ll in g in a car ob se rv ed a 20 10 Fo rd Tau ru s wit h he av il y ti n te d

w i n d ows pa ss by. Bec au se th e of fic ers be li ev ed th e ti nt was su ffi ci en tl y da r k t o

vi ol at e a Kan sa s Ci ty or di na nc e, th ey fo ll owe d th e ve hi cl e to in ve st ig at e. The ve hi cl e

pu ll ed in to th e dr iv eway of a ne arb y res id en ce, an d th e of fic ers pu ll ed in be hi nd it an d

act iv at ed th e em erg en cy li gh ts of th e sq ua d car. The dr iv er, Lum pk i n s , e x i t e d th e

ve hi cl e, lo ok ed at th e of

fic ers , an d st art ed walk in g away at a cas ua l pa ce. One of th e

of fi c ers m ad e ey e co nt act wit h Lum pk in s an d as ke d hi m to “ co m e he re,” an d

Lum pk in s refu se d, rep lying th at he was on pr iv at e pr op ert y

. The of fic ers pl aced hi m

in ha nd cu ffs ou t of co nc ern fo r of fic er sa fet y

. Bec au se th e si de an d rear win do ws of

th e ve hi cl e were effe ct iv el y bl ack ed ou t, on e of fic er l o ok ed th ro ug h th e fro nt

win ds hi el d o f th e v eh ic le “ jus t t o v eri fy

th at we di dn ’t hav e a t hr eat in th e car .”

W hi le ve rif

y in g th at th e ve hi cl e ha d no ot he r oc cu pa nt s, the of fic er no ti ced a pl as ti c ba g ho ld in g a gr een le afy su bs ta nc e in th e cen te r c o n s o l e th at ap pe ared

co ns is te nt wit h ho w th e of fic er ha d “ se en m ari

juan a ba gs pa ck ag ed in th e pa st .” He

al so no ti ced wha t ap pe ared to be a sm al l m ari juan a bl un t in th e c u p ho ld er-a sh tra y

area

. The of

fic ers at te m

pt ed to se iz e th e co nt rab an d bu t di sc ov ered th at th e do or s of

th e ve hi cl e were lo ck ed an d, in ad di ti on , th at th e ke y s to th e ve hi cl e were lying on th e

dr iv er’s s eat , lo ck ed in si de

.

The Hon or ab le Howar d F. Sach s, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1

Dis tri ct of Mi ss ou ri, ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco m m en da ti on of th e Hon or ab le Sara h

W . Hay s, Un it ed Sta te s M ag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-Th e o f f i c ers so on le arn ed fro m a st at us ch eck on th e ve hi cl e’s li cen se pl at es

th at it was reg is te red to Bu dg et Ren t-a -Car

. It ha d be en ren te d by La ti sh a Hug he s.

Lum pk in s was no t li st ed as an au th or iz ed dr iv er. Hug he s was pr es en t at th e res id en ce

an d cam e ou ts id e to ta lk to th e of fic ers , bu t sh e di d no t ha ve a sp are ke y an d refu se d

to gi ve co ns en t fo r th e of fic ers to en t e r t h e v e h i c le

. The of fic ers co nt act ed Bu dg et

Ren t-a -Car an d ex pl ai ne d th e si tu at io n to Mi ch el le Kon ecn y , a lo cal of fic e m an ag er.

K o n ecn y in fo rm ed th e of fic ers th at th e ve hi cl e was ov erd ue fo r ret ur n an d t h a t

Bu dg et ha d be en de m an di ng it s re t u r n fro m Hug he s fo r se ve ral da y s. Kon ecn y

req ue st ed th at th e o ffi cers wait wit h th e ve hi cl e un ti l sh e arri ve d to ta ke cu st od y of

it

.

W he n Kon ecn y arri ve d, sh e sh owe d th e of fic ers pr oo f of own ers hi p of t h e

ve hi cl e an d un lo ck ed it rem ot el y wit h a sp a r e s e t of ke y s. Sh e th en co ns en te d to a

se arch of th e ve hi cl e. A dr ug do g whi ch ha d be en br ou gh t to th e sc en e im m ed ia te ly

al ert ed to th e cen te r co ns ol e, an d th e pr ev io us ly ob se rv ed mar i juan a was rem ov ed

. The dr ug do g al ert ed ag ai n to th e cen te r co ns ol e, ho wev er, an d th e of fic ers

di sc ov ered crac k co cai ne , po wde r co cai ne , ecs ta sy pi ll s, an d m or e m ari juan a wit hi n

th e co ns ol e. The y al so di sc ov ered a Hers ta l 5.7 x 28 ha nd gu n un de r th e dr iv er’s se at

. The ha nd gu n was lo ad ed wit h t wen ty rou nd s o f am m un it io n c ap ab le of

pe ne tra ti ng

bu ll et -p ro of

ve st s.

A f t e r hi s in di ct m en t, Lum

pk in s m ov ed to su pp res s th e dr ug s an d fir earm

reco ve red fro m th e ve hi cl e, arg ui ng th at th e se arch was no t va li d un de r an y ex cep ti on

to th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed th e m ot i o n on each of se ve ral

al te rn at iv e gr ou nd s , in cl ud in g th at Kon ecn y va li dl y co ns en te d to th e se arch

. Lum pk in s su bs eq ue nt ly pl ed gu il ty pu rs ua nt to a writ te n pl ea ag reem en t, co nd it io ne d

on hi s ri gh t t o p ur su e th is ap pe al

.

W he n rev ie win g th e de ni al of a m ot io n to su pp res s, we rev ie w “ th e di st ric t

co ur t’s fin di ng s of fact fo r cl ear erro r an d it s de te rm in at io ns o f p r o b a bl e cau se an d

-3

-reas on ab le su s p i c i o n de no vo .” Uni te d St at es v. Rob in so n , 66 4 F.3 d 70 1, 70 3 (8 th

Ci r. 20 11 ).

Lum pk in s co nt en ds th at th e warra nt le ss se arch of th e ve hi cl e was no t jus ti fie d

un de r an y ex cep ti on s to th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t warra nt req ui rem en t. W e di sa gr ee 2

an d ho ld th at th e se arch was va li d pu rs ua nt to th e co ns en t o b t a i ne d fro m Kon ecn y

.

“ [A] v eh ic le s e a r c h pu rs ua nt to vo lu nt ary co ns en t fro m a th ird pa rty wi th au th or it y

ov er t he ve hi cl e d oe s n ot vi ol at e th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t.” Uni te d St at es v. Ch av ez

Lo ya , 52 8 F .3d 54 6, 5 54 (8t h C ir. 2 00 8)

.

The ren ta l co nt ract fo r th e ve hi cl e st at ed

, “ If Ren te r fai ls to ret ur n th e ve hi cl e

. . . wit h i n 2 4 h o ur s fo ll owi ng

. . . or al de m an d

. . . Ren te r wil l be de em ed to be in

un la wfu l po ss es si on of th e ve hi cl e.” It is un di sp ut ed th at Bu dg et pe rs on ne l co nt act ed

Hug he s an d m ad e an or al de m an d fo r th e ret ur n of t h e ve hi cl e on Ja nu ary 3 1; th us , by Feb ru ary 3, t h e d a y o f th e se arch

, Hug he s’s po ss es si on was in vi ol at io n of th e

a g r e e m en t. The ren ta l ag reem en t fu rth er pr ov id ed th at “ [t]he ve hi cl e m ay b e

rep os se ss ed

. . . wit ho ut no ti ce if it

. . . is us ed in vi ol at i o n o f l a w or of th is

ag reem en t.” The refo re, whe n Kon ecn y arri ve d as a rep res en ta ti ve of Bu dg et

, sh e ha d

th e au th or it y to ta ke im

m ed ia te cu st od y of th e ve hi cl e an d to gi ve va li d co ns en t to a

se arch of t he ve hi cl e.

The pa rti es di sp ut e whe th er Lum pk in s ha d a reas on ab le ex pe ct at ion of pr iva cy 2

in th e ve hi cl e so as to co nf er st an di ng to ch al le ng e th e se arch

. W hi le Lum pk in s, who

was no t lis te d as an aut ho riz ed dri ve r on th e ren ta l agre em en t, had pe rm is si on fro m Hug he s to us e th e ve hi cl e, cf

. Uni te d St at es v. Best

, 13 5 F.3 d 1 2 2 3

, 1 2 2 5 (8 th Ci r. 19 98 ); Uni te d S ta te s v. Mu ha mmad , 58 F.3d 35 3, 3 55 (8t h Ci r. 19 95 ) (p er cu ria m ), by Feb ru ary 3 Hug he s’s own au th or iz at io n arg ua bl y ha d be en rev ok ed

. Fo r pu rp os es of ou r an al y si s, we as su m e wit ho ut de ci di ng th at Lum pk in s ha d st an di ng to ch al le ng e th e se arch

.

-4

-Lum

pk in s, rel y in g on Geo rg ia v. Ran do lp h

, 54 7 U.S. 10 3 (2 00 6)

, arg ue s th at

Kon ecn y ’s co ns en t to th e se arch was in va li d in th e face of co nt em po ran eo us refu sa ls

of co ns en t fro m Hug he s an d Lum pk in s. Se e id

. at 12 2- 23 (h ol di ng th at “ a ph y si cal ly

pr es en t in ha bi ta nt ’s ex pr es s refu sa l of co ns en t to a po li ce sear ch is di sp os it iv e as to

hi m , reg ard le ss of th e co ns en t of a fel lo w oc cu pa nt ”). It is no t cl ear th at Ran do lp h

, whi ch in vo lv ed a se arch of a res id en ce, ap pl ie s in th e co nt ex t of a ve hi cl e se arch

. Se e

id

. at 11 5 (rel y in g on th e “ cen tu rie s- ol d p r i nc ip le of res pe ct fo r th e pr iv acy of th e

ho m e” an d no ti ng th at “ it i s b e yo n d d is pu te th at th e ho m e is en ti tl ed to sp eci al

pr ot ect io n as the cen te r of th e pr iv at e li ve s of ou r pe op le ” (q uo ta ti on s o m it te d) ); cf

. Ch av ez Lo

ya , 52 8 F.3 d at 55 5 (ci ti ng Rak as v. Ill in oi s , 43 9 U.S. 12 8, 14 8 (1 97 8)

(“ W e ha ve on nu m ero us oc cas io ns po in te d ou t th at cars are no t to be tre at ed

id en ti cal ly wit h ho us es or [a]par tm en ts fo r Fo ur th Am en dm en t pu rp os es .”)). In an y

ev en t, neit he r Lum

pk in s no r Hug he s wou ld qu al ify as a “ fel lo w oc cu pa nt ,” Ran do lp h

, 54 7 U.S. at 12 3, of th e ve hi cl e fo r pu rp os es of Ra n d o l p h aft er Kon ecn y arri ve d to

rep os se ss it

. The re is no “ co m m on ly he ld un de rs ta nd in g” in so ci et y th at a dr iv er of

an ov erd ue ren ta l car, on no ti ce th at th e ren ta l car co m pa ny is en ti tl ed to rep os se ss it s

ve hi cl e at an y ti m e, ne ve rth el es s m ay ex erci se au th or it y ov er th e ve hi cl e co nt rary to

th e rep os se ss or ’s. Se e id

. at 1 11

.

Bec au se co ns en t fo r th e se arch was va li dl y ob ta in ed

, th e warra nt le ss se arch of

th e ve hi cl e di d no t vi ol at e th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t. Se e Ch av ez Lo ya , 5 2 8 F

. 3 d at

55 4. 3

Add it io na ll y , whi le Lum pk in s do es no t di sp ut e th at th e tra ffi c s t o p to

in ve st ig at e hi s il le ga ll y ti nt ed win do ws was va li d, he arg ue s th at hi s ne arl y im m ed ia te

de te nt io n an d pl acement in ha nd cu ffs co ns ti tu te d an arre st wit ho ut pr ob ab le cau se

. The di st ric t co ur t reject ed th is arg um en t, fin di ng th at Lum pk in s was no t un de r arre st

Bec au se we fin d th e warra nt le ss se arch va li d on th e ba si s of co ns en t, we ne ed 3

no t ad dr es s th e al te rn at iv e th eo rie s ad va nc ed by th e Gov ern m en t to jus ti fy th e se arch

.

-5

-at th e ti m e of hi s i n i t i a l d e t en ti on an d th at th e de te nt io n was “ reas on ab ly rel at ed in

sc op e to th e ci rcu m st an ces whi ch jus ti fie d th e in te rfer en ce in th e fir st pl ace.” Ter ry

v. Ohi o , 39 2 U.S. 1, 20 (1 96 8)

. Howev er, we ne ed no t de ci de th e qu es ti on of whe th er

Lum pk in s’s in it ia l de te nt io n vi ol at ed th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t. Eve n as su m in g th at it

di d, we ha ve he ld in si m il ar ci rcu m st an ces th at

, whe re co ns en t to se arch a ve hi cl e is

va lid ly obt ai ne d, a pr eced in g il le ga l se iz ur e an d de te nt io n of an ot he r ve hi cle oc cu pa nt

i s “ind ep en de nt an d se pa rat e fro m th e di sc ov ery of ” co nt rab an d in th e ve hi c l e

. Uni te d St at es v. Gre en , 27 5 F.3 d 69 4, 70 0 (8 th C i r

. 20 01 ). Tha t ru le ap pl ie s he re

be cau se Kon ecn y , li ke th e co ns en ti ng ve hi cl e oc cu pa nt in Gre en , ga ve au th or it at iv e

co ns en t to th e se arch of th e ve hi cl e. Thu s, “ th e di sc ov ery of dr ug s [an d a fir earm ] in

th e car is no t a ‘frui t’ of [Lump k i n s ’s ] il le ga l de te nt io n” an d su pp res si on of th at

ev id en ce i s n ot warran te d. Se e id

. at 69 9.

Fi na ll y , Lum

pk in s ch al le ng es th e ap pl ic at io n of th e care er-o ffen de r pr ov is io ns

of U.S.S.G. § 4B 1.1 to th e cal cu la ti on of hi s ad vi so ry se nt en ci ng gu id el in es ran ge

. H o wev er, Lum

pk in s’s pl ea ag reem en t “ ex pr es sl y waiv es hi s rig ht to ap pe al hi s

se nt en ce

. . . on an y gr ou nd ex cep t cl ai m s of (1 ) in effe ct iv e as si st an ce of co un se l; (2 )

pr os ecu to ria l m is co nd uc t; or (3 ) an il le ga l se nt en ce.” Mo reo ve r, th e pl ea ag reem en t

sp eci fie s th at “a mi s a pp li cat io n of th e Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s” is no t an “ il le ga l

se nt en ce” fo r pu rp os es of th e waiv er. W e can id en ti fy n o t hi ng in th e reco rd to

su gg es t th at th is waiv er was un kn owi ng , in vo lu nt ary, or wou ld res ul t in a m is carr ia ge

of jus ti ce. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Bir br ag he r , 60 3 F.3 d 47 8, 49 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ).

Acco rd in gl y , we en fo rce Lum pk in s’s waiv er of th e rig ht to ap pe al hi s se nt en ce, an d

we de cl in e to reac h t he m eri ts of h is § 4 B1 .1 cl ai m

. Se e id

. at 4 92

.

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we affi rm th e de ni al of th e m ot io n to su pp res s an d

th e se nt en ce p ro no un ced by the di st ric t co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

-6

-