FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 19, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 14 66 6 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 0- cr-2 08 08 -AJ- 1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us DOUGLAS PUPO-REYNALDO , a.k .a. Dou gl as Pupo , a.k .a. Dou gl as Pere z, a.k .a. Reynal do Pupo , a.k .a. Ju anPere z, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Jun e 1 9, 2 01 2) Befo re HULL, MARTIN an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:Dou gl as Pupo -Reynal do ap pe al s h is co nv ic ti on forpo ss es si on of afir earm

by a con vi ct edfel on on th e g ro un d t ha t the di st ric t co urt erredby den y in g h is m ot io n t o s up pr es s t he ev id en ce s ei zedfro m hi s h om e. Afte r a tho ro ug h re vi ew of th e rec or d, we af

firm . I. Pupo -Reynal do was i nd ic te d fo r po ss es si on of afir earm by a con vi ct ed fel on , invi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. § 9 22 (g ). The i nd ic tm en t i de nt ifi edfou r di ffer en t fir earm s an d fi ve di ffer en t ty pe s o f amm

un it io n fo un d i n P up o- Reynal do ’s po ss es si on . Prio r to tri al , he m ov edto supp res s t he fir earm s an d a m m un it io n se iz edfro m

hi s h ou se on th e g ro un ds th atpo li ce en te redhi s h om e wit ho uta warra nt , with n o e xi ge ntcir cu m st an ces , andwitho utth e v ol un ta ry co ns en t o f an y of th e res id en ts . He exp la in edth atth e co ns en t fo rm si gn edby his co m

m on -la w wife , Irai m e Bag ue t, was si gn edaft er the sea rchan d was no t v ol un ta ril y gi ve n. 1 Sev eral de te ct iv es tes ti fie d a t the supp res si on he ari ng ab ou t h ow an in ve st ig at io n i nt o aho m e-i nv as io n s ch em e le adth em to Pupo -Reynal do . Dete ct iv e Jo e Me nd ez t es ti fie d t ha t h e was ass ig ne d a s a t as k fo rce o ffi cer wi th th e Pupo-Rey

naldo also cha lleng ed the a dmission of the observations by office rs stationed 1 on the roof during the sear ch, arguing that the office rs had tre spassed onto his roof a nd thus had no lawful va

ntag e point to witness him allege dly throwingthe fire arms out a window. T he district court grante d Pupo-Rey naldo’s motion to suppress this evidence , and the g overnme nt does not appe al. Ther efor e, wedo not discuss this i ssue her e. 2DEA, andha d wo rk edon th e h om e-i nv as io n i nv es ti ga ti on , bu t was no t d ire ct ly

in vo lv edwith P up o- Reynal do ’s cas e. Men de z h adrece iv edin fo rm at io n abo uta pl an ne d a rm edrob be ry

fro m a so ur ce, an d h e p as se d t he in fo rm at io n o n t o t he po li ce. He h adno reco ll ect io n o f Pupo -Reynal do ’s cas e. Duri ng Men de z’s te st im on y , def

en se co un se l at te m

pt edto im

pe ach Men de z wit h p ot en ti al ly co nf li ct in g s ta te m en ts : Al th ou gh he ha d s ta te d e arl ie r th athe rece iv edin fo rm at io n ab ou t the ho m e in va si onfro m a co nf id en ti al so ur ce, Me nd ez l at er d en ie d t ha t h e ha d o bt ai ne d i nf

orm at io n fr om

a reg is te redco nf

id en ti al in fo rm an t. He al so de ni ed rece iv in g an e xtra d ay

of p ai d v acat io n fo r hi s p art ic ip at io n i n t he ho m e in va si on cas e, de sp it e rec or ds sh owi ng th athe was c red it edon e v acat io n d ay du rin g t he m on th of t he in ve st ig at io n. Dete ct iv e Yan ie l Herna nd ez, an in ve st ig at orwith t he Mi am i-Da de Po li ce Dep artm en t’s ro bb ery bu reau , who was d ire ct ly inv ol ve d i n P up o- Reynal do ’s cas e, te st ifi edth athi s u ni t was in ve st ig at in g the all eg edho m e-i nv as io n ro bb ery in Octo be r 20 10 . On th e n ig htof Oc to be r 25 , aft er o ffi cers ex haus te d a ll in ve st ig at iv e te ch ni qu es , th ey de ci de d t o v is itPupo -Reynal do ’s ho us e to co nduc t a

“ kn oc k a ndtal k” co ns en su al en co un te r. The p lan was to m ak e co nt actan d e it he r di sp el or c on firm

th e al le ga ti on of aho m e in va si on rob be ry . Acco rd in g t o Hernand ez, atap pr ox im at el y 11 :0 0 p .m ., Herna nd ez an d 3Dete ct iv e Sco ttOgd enkn oc ke d o n t he fro ntdo orof P up o- Reynal do ’s ho us e.

The y were dres se d i n t act ic al ve st s wi th “po li ce” wri tt eninbi g l et te rs on th e fro nt an d b ack . Irai m e Bag ue t qui ck ly ope ne d t he do oran d Herna nd ez, s pe ak in g t o h er in Sp an is h, i de nt ifi edhi m se lf a s a M ia m i-Da de po li ce o ffi cer a ndask edto sp eak to Pupo -Reynal do . Bag ue t was ve ry co op erat iv e an d i m

m ed ia te ly inv it edth e de te ct iv es in to th e h ou se . She cal le d fo r Pupo -Reynal do , who ap pe aredat t he to p of th e st ai rs na ke d. Hern an de z id en ti fie d h im se lf a ndst at edth athe wis he d t o sp eakwith h im . Pup o- Reynal do ag reed , bu t as ke d t o g etdre ss edfir st . Seco nd s la te r, Hern an de z h earda m et al cli ng an d the n h eardov er the rad io , “ [h ]e’ s co m in g ou t o f th e h ou se with g un s.” Herna nd ez an d Og de n wen t up t he st ai rs an d c le ared th e ups ta irs roo m s t o m ak e su re n o o ne was h id in g the re. Inon e ro om , th ey fou nd a b ab y sl eep in g i n abe d. Two o th er o ffi cers lo cat edPupo -Reynal do an d t oo k h im in to cu st od y . Hern an de z wen t d own st ai rs to sp eakto Bag ue t, wh o h adbe co m e v ery ne rv ou s an d was cry in g. Sh e ex pr es se d c on cern forhe r ch il dr eninth e h ou se . Hern an de z ex pl ai ne d t o h er tha t Pupo -Reynal do ha d t hr own gu ns ou t o f th e se co ndst ory

win do w. Herna nd ez b ro ug htBag ue t ups ta irs to see th e b ab y sl eep in g, af

te r whi ch sh e cal m eddo wn. Hern an de z th enbro ug htBag ue t b ack do wns ta irs an d a sk edforco ns en t t o s earc h the ho us e. Bag ue t ag reed , and 4Hern an de z rev ie wedth e wri tt enco ns en t fo rm with h er i n S pa ni sh . Herna nd ez co nf irmed th atno on e h adth ei r gu ns po in te d a t Ba gu et , no on e th reat en edto do an yth in g wi th he r ch il dr en , andno on e p ro mis edBag ue t an yth in g i n e xc ha ng e fo r he r co ns en t. On ce Ba gu etsi gn edth e fo rm , po li ce s earc he d t he ho us e an d fo un d be ar s pr ay , m

ul ti pl e m as ks , andgl ov es , alo ng with t he fir earm s an d a m m un it io n. Hern an de z la te r ob ta in eda writ te n s ta te m en t fr om Bag ue t i n wh ic h s he adm it te d t ha t s he gave po li ce p erm is si on to en te r an d s earc h t he ho us e. Bag ue t fu rth er wro te th atsh e h adno id ea the re were gu ns inhe r ho us e an d t ha t Pupo Reynal do ha d o nl y

be enli vi ng with h er fo r on e m on th . She als o e xp la in edho w sh e m ethi m

an d s ta te d t ha t Pupo -Reynal do ’s ex- gi rlf rie ndna m edDix Mar ie ha d br ou gh t the bo xe s o f amm un it io n wh ensh e d el iv eredPupo -Reynal do ’s be lo ng in gs . Mi am i-Da de Po li ce Det ect iv e Sco ttOgd entes ti fie d t ha t h e was at the do or with Hernand ez an d d idno t re m em be r Hern an de z sa y in g a nyth in g wh enhe kn oc ke d. Og de n c on firm edth atBag ue t o pe ne d t he do or an d l etth e o ffi cers en te r. Afte r th ey

sp ok e to Pupo -Reynal do an d a ll owe d h im to ge t dres se d, Og de n h earda m et al li c cl an gi ng so un d a ndth enhe ardov er the rad io th atPupo -Reynal do was go in g o uta win do w. He th enhe ardan ot he r co m m un ic at io n t ha t Pupo -Reynal do ha d t hr own gu ns ou t the win do w. 5The rem ai ni ng off ic ers in vo lv edinth e Oct ob er 2 5 e nc ou nt er p ro vi de d te st im on ie s t ha t wer e la rg el y co ns is te ntwith tho se gi ve n b y Hern an de z an d Ogd en . 2 Irai m e Bag ue t p ro vi de d c on fli ct in g t es ti m on y . She st at edth atonth e n ig ht of Octo be r 25 , 20 10 , sh e an d P up o- Reynal do wentto be d b efo re 1 1: 00 p.m . At so m e p oi nt , Bag ue t’s t een ag e so n c am e in to th e ro om an d t ol d h er tha t the po li ce were o n t he ne ig hb or ’s roo f. Arou nd11 :4 0 p .m ., Bag ue t h earda hardkn oc k o n th e d oo r an d s om eo ne say, “ op enth e d oo r, po li ce d ep art m en t.” By the ti m e sh e go t d own th e st ai rs an d i nt o t he li vi ng roo m , fou r orfiv e p ol ic e o ffi cers were in si de th e h ou se be cau se he r so n h adop en edth e d oo r. Two o f th e o ffi cers sp ok e Sp an is h a ndask edhe r if

th ere wer e an y

weap on s o r drug s i n t he ho us e. Bag ue t t es ti fie d tha t the off ic ers th encal le d t o P up o- Reynal do , who was up st ai rs . Pup o- Reynal do was wearin g o nl y hi s u nd erwea r an d h e as ke d t o g et dr es se d b efo re t al ki ng to po li ce. Two o r th ree o ffi cers ranup st ai rs an d ali tt le whi le lat er, the y

cam e d own st ai rs with P up o- Reynal do . Bag ue t as ke d abo uthe r ch il dr enan d t he po li ce t ol d h er tha t the y were fi ne . The p ol ic e as ke d h er t o s ig n a co ns en t fo rm

to sea rchth e h ou se be fo re s he co ul d s ee h er ch il dr en . She si gn edth e There was c onflictingtestimony about the number

of off icer s in the house and who w as 2 involved in Pupo-Rey

naldo’s ar rest. The se inconsistencie s are not releva nt to the validity

of the initial entry

and the c onsent to sear ch. 6fo rm

be cau se th e p ol ic e were a lre ady in si de th e h ou se an d s he di d n otha ve an yth in g t o h id e. Once sh e si gn edth e fo rm , sh e was all owe d t o s ee h er ch il dr en . Acco rd in g t o B ag ue t, af

te r sh e si gn edth e co ns en t fo rm an d c am e do wns ta irs , sh e was ha nd cu ffed . Whe n p ol ic e u nc uf fedhe r la te r, th ey

ask edhe r to si gna writ te n s ta te m en t. The po li ce t ol d h er the y were g oi ng to gi ve he r an ot he r ch an ce an d t hr eat en edto tak e h er ch il dr enaway fro m he r if sh e d idno t co op erat e. The po li ce al so cal le d h er b ro th er t o t ak e th e ch il dr en . One o f th e o ffi cers to ldhe r to writ e th atth e p ol ic e h adco m e to th e h ou se , sh e h adop en edth e d oo r, an d s he ha d s eenPupo -Reynal do th ro w th e weap on s o utth e win do w. She t es ti fie d tha t sh e co m pl ie d b ecau se sh e was afra idforhe r ch il dr en , bu t s ai d the st at em en t was fal se an d s he di d n otsee Pupo -Reynal do with a ny guns . Bag ue t ad mit te d t ha t i t was he r si gn atur e o n t he co ns en t fo rm an d t ha t the st at em en t was inhe r ha nd writ in g. Bu t s he ex pl ai ne d tha t s he li edforhe r ch il dr enan d wo ul d d o i t ag ai n i f sh e n eed edto , alt ho ug h s he wou ldno t l ie forPupo -Reynal do . And al th ou gh sh e v is it edhi m

injail reg ul arl y

an d s po ke to hi m

by pho ne ev eryday , Pupo -Reynal do di d n otaskhe r to li e fo r hi m . The m ag is tra te jud ge reco m m en de d g ran ti ng inpa rt a ndde nyin g i n p artth e m ot io n t o s up pr es s. Th e m ag is tra te jud ge fou ndth atBag ue t’s t es ti m on y was n ot cred ib le be cau se sh e h ada m ot iv e to pro vi de tes ti m on y fav or ab le to th e d efen se 7an d b ecau se sh e st at edth atsh e wou ldli e fo r he r ch il dr en . The m ag is tra te jud ge

al so fou ndth at , bas edon Hern an de z’s an d Og de n’s cr ed ib le tes ti m on ie s, the in it ia l en try on to Pupo -Reynal do ’s pro pe rty was a p erm is si bl e “ kn oc k a ndtal k.” The m ag is tra te jud ge furth er fo un d t ha t the sea rchof the ho us e was pe rm is si bl e b as ed on Bag ue t’s v ol un ta ry

co ns en t. The m ag is tra te jud ge de cl in edto ad dr es s Men de z’s cred ib il it y , fin di ng itwas n otrel ev an t t o t he leg al it y of t he en try or the vo lu nt ari ne ss of t he co ns en t. The di stric t co urt ad op te d t he reco m m en da ti on ov er al l o bjec ti on s. Fo ll owi ng a th ree- da y

tri al , th e jury con vi ct edPupo -Reynal do , andth e d is tri ct co urt s en te nc edhi m

to 78 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t. Thi s i s Pupo -Reynal do ’s ap pe al . II.

“ A di st ric t co urt’s ru li ng on a m ot io n t o s up pr es s p res en ts m ix edqu es ti on s of law an d fa ct .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ra mir ez -Ch il el , 28 9 F .3d74 4, 7 48 -4 9 (1 1t h C ir. 20 02 ). W e rev ie w “ fin di ng s o f fac t fo r cl ear e rro r an d t he ap pl ic at io n o f th e la w to th os e fac ts de no vo .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ma rt in el li , 45 4 F .3d13 00 , 13 06 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). In r ev ie win g t he di st ric t co urt’s ru li ng , we m us t co ns tru e th e fac ts inth e li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e p rev ai li ng pa rty bel ow. Uni te d Sta tes v. S mith , 45 9 F.3 d 1 27 6, 1 29 0 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 6) . Whe th er an in di vi du al ’s con se ntwas v ol un ta ry 8is a factua l fi nd in g t ha t we re vi ew on ly for cl ear e rro r. Uni te d Sta tes v. Za pa ta , 18 0 F .3d12 37 , 12 40 -4 1 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 9) . Cred ib il it y

de te rm in at io ns are wi th in th e p ro vi nc e o f th e fac t fi nd er

“be cau se th e fac t fi nd er p ers on al ly obs erv es th e te st im on y an d i s t hu s i n abe tt er po si ti onth ana rev ie win g c ou rt t o a ss es s t he cred ib il it y of wi tn es se s.” Rami re

zCh il el , 28 9 F .3dat 7 49 . Furt he rm or e, if tes ti m on y

pre se nt edby opp os in g witne ss es at ahe ari ng is in“ di rectco nf li ct ,” th e d is tri ctco urt’s d eci si on to len d cred en ce t o o ne pa rty’ s v ers io n s ho ul d b e “ co nc lu si ve ” an d warran ts rev ers al on ly if t he co urt cr ed it s “ exce edin gl yim pr ob ab le ” te st im on y . Id. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o mit te d) . Like wis e, we “ m us t ac cep t the ev id en ce u nl es s i t i s co nt rary to th e la ws o f na tu re, o r is so in co ns is te ntor i m pr ob ab le on it s fa ce tha t n o reas on ab le fact fin de r co ul d a ccep t i t.” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . III. The Fo urth Am en dm en t p ro vi de s t ha t: “ The rig htof the pe op le to be sec ur e in th ei r pe rs on s, h ou se s, p ap ers , andeffec ts , aga in stun reas on ab le sea rch es an d se iz ur es , sh al l n otbe vi ol at ed. . .” U .S. Co ns t. am en d. IV. The Fo urth Am en dm en t i s n otim

pl ic at edby entry

on to pri va te lan d fo r le gi ti m at e p ol ic e pu rp os es un co nn ect edwith asea rch of t he pre m is es . Uni te d Sta tes v. Ta yl or , 45 8 F.3 d 1 20 1, 1 20 4 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 6) . “ Abs en t ex pr es s o rd ers fro m th e p ers on in 9po ss es si on , an o ffi cer m ay walkup th e st ep s an d kno ckon th e d oo r of an y m an ’s cas tl e, with t he ho ne stin te ntof a sk in g que st io ns of t he oc cupa ntth ereo f.” Id. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o mit te d) . W e ref er t o t hi s p rin ci pl e as th e “ kn oc k and ta lk ” ex cep ti on to th e Fo urth Am en dm en t’s warr an t re qu ire m en t. Se e, e.g . , id. at 12 05 . Add it io na ll y , a warran t i s n otrequi redwhen a se arch is m ad e p ur su an t t o vo lu nt ary co ns en t. Ill in ois v. Ro dr ig ue z , 49 7 U.S. 1 77 , 18 1 (1 99 0) . Con se ntis vo lu nt ary “ if i t i s the pro du ctof a n e ss en ti al ly free an d u nc on st rai ne d c ho ic e.” Uni te d Sta tes v. Pu rc el l , 23 6 F .3d12 74 , 12 81 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o mit te d) . The g ov ern m en t b ears th e b ur de n o f pr ov in g t he ex is te nc e o f va li d c on se ntth atis gi ve n fr eel y an d v ol un ta ril y . Uni te d Sta tes v. Blak e , 88 8 F .2d 79 5, 7 98 (11 th Cir . 19 89 ). Our re vi ew of a co ns en t d et erm in at io n u su al ly turn s o n

“ cred ib il it y

ch oi ces res ul ti ng fro m

co nf li ct in g t es ti m on y .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Gar ci a , 89 0 F .2d35 5, 3 59 (11 th Cir . 19 89 ). Pupo -Reynal do arg ue s t ha t the m ag is tra te jud ge fai le d t o m ak e p ro pe r cred ib il it y

de te rm in at io ns an d d is reg ard edin co ns is te nc ie s i n t he off ic ers ’ te st im on y . He con te nd s t ha t the po li ce i nt en de d t o s earc h h is ho m e whe n t he y co nduc te d t he “ kn oc k a ndtal k,” an d t ha t Ba gu et ’s con se ntwas n otvo lunt ary. Afte r rev ie win g t he reco rd , we di sa gr ee. Fi rs t, n ot hi ng inth e rec or d 10de m on st rat es th atth e m ag is tra te jud ge m ad e im pr op er cr ed ib il it y

de te rm in at io ns . The m ag is tra te jud ge di d n otcred itth e te st im on y of t he law en fo rcem en t o ffi cers si m pl y be cau se th ey

were o ffi cers . Nor d idhe fin d B ag ue t’s t es ti m on y lac ki ng in cred ib il it y

so le ly becau se of h er re la ti on sh ip with P up o- Reynal do . Rath er, the m ag is tra te jud ge ex pl ai ne d t ha t Ba gu et ’s tes ti m on y was n otcred ib le be cau se sh e ha d d em on st rat eda wil li ng ne ss to li e, an d h e n ot edth athe r writ te n s ta te m en t co nt ai ne d fa ct s, s uc h a s t he nam e o f Pupo -Reynal do ’s ex- gi rlf rie nd , th atlaw en fo rcem en t wo ul d n otha ve kn own . Andth e m ag is tra te jud ge no te d tha t Ba gu et ’s te st im on y was u nc orro bo rat edev enth ou gh he r te en ag e so n, wh o was pre se nt du rin g t he sea rch , andhe r br othe r, who po li ce al le ge dl y cal le d dur in g t he search , co ul d h av e te st ifi ed . Add it io na ll y , th ere was no erro r in th e m ag is tra te jud ge ’s dec is io n n otto m ak e a cre di bi li ty det erm in at io n abo utMen de z’s te st im on y . Men de z’s te st im on y ab ou t h ow h e le arn edof t he all eg edho m e in va si on was n otrel ev an t t o wh ethe r th e of fic ers ga in edlawf

ul en try int o P up o- Reynal do ’s ho us e an d wh ethe r Bag ue t vo lu nt ari ly con se nt edto th e se arch . Seco nd , no th in g i n t he reco rdsh ows th atth e m ag is tra te jud ge erre d b y co nc lu di ng th atth e o ffi cers in te nd edto pu rs ue a va li d “ kn oc k a ndtal k.” The of fic ers di rect ly inv ol ve d i n m ak in g c on ta ctwith P up o- Reynal do each tes ti fie d 11th atth ey

di d s o t o p rev en t the an ti ci pa te d h om e in va si onfro m oc cu rri ng . Thi rd , th e m ag is tra te jud ge pro pe rly det erm in edth atth e o ffi cers ’ en try int o th e h ou se was l awfu l. The off ic ers ’ te st im on y

est ab li sh edth atHern an de z kno ck ed on th e d oo r an d B ag ue t o pe ne d i t an d i nv it edth e o ffi cers in si de . There is no th in g in th e rec or d t ha t d em on st rat es th atHern an de z’s te st im on y was “ ex ceed in gl y im pr ob ab le .” Se e Rami re

z- Ch il el , 28 9 F .3dat 7 49 . Last ly, th e m ag is tra te jud ge di d n otcle arl y err i n d et erm in in g t ha t Ba gu et vo lu nt ari ly con se nt edto th e se arch . In h is rol e as fact -fi nd er, the m ag is tra te jud ge fo un d B ag ue t’s t es ti m on y no t cr ed ib le . Se e id. Altho ug h t he re were so m e in co ns is te nc ie s b etweenth e o ffi cers ’ te st im on y with re ga rdto th e ev en ts rel at in g to Pupo -Reynal do ’s arres t, n on e o f th os e in co ns is te nc ie s m ad e Hern an de z’s te st im on y ab ou t o bt ai ni ng th e wri tt enco ns en t “ ex ceed in gl y im pr ob ab le .” Id. Add it io na ll y , Bag ue t t es ti fie d t ha t s he si gn edth e co ns en t fo rm be cau se sh e d idno t ha ve anyth in g t o h id e. Bas edon th is tes ti m on y , th e m ag is tra te jud ge pro pe rly co nc lu de d t ha t Ba gu etga ve vo lu nt ary co ns en t t o t he sea rch . Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af firm th e d is tri ctco urt’s d en ia l o f th e m ot io n to supp res s. AFFIRMED.

12