# United States Court of A ppe als

For the Eig hth Circu it

No. 1 2- 26 41

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

Plai nt if f - Ap pe ll ee

v.

Ada m Jo se ph W in ars ke

D ef en da nt - App el la nt

App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t
fo r th e Dis tri ct of No rth Dako ta

Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 5, 2 01 3

Fi le d: May 21, 2 01 3

Befo re WOL LMAN an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s, an d HOLMES, Dis tri ct 1

Ju dg e.

HOLMES, Dis tri ct Ju dg e.

The Hon or ab le P.K. Hol m es , III, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1

th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, s it ti ng by des ig na ti on

.Ada m Jo se ph W in ars ke ap pe al s th e jud gm en t of th e di s t ric t co ur t fo ll owi ng 2

th e de ni al of hi s m ot io n to su pp res s ev id en ce se iz ed du rin g a se arch of hi s gi rlf rie nd ’s

ve hi cl e. W e aff

irm.

I.

On Ju ne 29

, 20 12

, W in ars ke was se nt en ced to a m an da to ry m in im um te rm of

im pr is on m en t of fift een y ears for po ss es si ng a fi rear m an d a m m un it io n in vi ol at io n

of 18 U.S.C. § 92 2( g)

. The m an da to ry m in im um te rm of im

pr is on m en t was im

po se d

pu rs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e) be cau se , at th e ti m e of th e of fen se , W in ars ke was

co ns id ered an arm ed care er cri m in al wit h a hi st or y of th ree pr ev io us co nv ic ti on s fo r

vi ol en t felo ni es

. In arre st in g W in ars ke

, po li ce rel ie d la rg el y on th e as si st an ce of an

in fo rm an t n am ed Mi ch ael Ferg el

.

In earl y Ju ne of 20 11

, whi le Ferg el was on st at e pa ro le awai ti ng se nt en ci ng on

fel on y ch arg es , he be cam e a co nf id en ti al in fo rm an t fo r la w en fo rcem en t. Ferg el was

pu t in co nt act wit h Bi sm arck Po li ce Offi cer Je rry St ei n an d be ga n su pp lying Offi cer

St ei n wit h “ ti ps ” ab ou t il le ga l act iv it y ta ki ng pl ace in an d aro un d th e Bi sm arck area

. Alt ho ug h Ferg el se rv ed as an in fo rm an t fo r on ly a m on th

, it is un di sp ut ed th at in th at

ti m e Ferg el pr ov id ed po li ce wit h accu rat e in fo rm at io n ab ou t lo cal cri m in al act iv it y

. Sp eci fic al ly, Ferg el pr ov id ed Offi cer St ei n wit h in fo rm a t i o n ab ou t area dr ug us ers

an d s up pl ie rs an d d is cl os ed th e lo cat io n of se ve ral in di vi du al s who were wan te d i n

co nn ect io n wi th ab ou t a d oz en ho m e b ur gl ari es

.

On Ju ne 18

, 20 11

, Ferg el be ga n c o mm u n i c a ti ng wit h Offi cer St ei n ab ou t

an ot he r po ss ib le cri m e, th is ti m e in vo lv in g an al le ge dl y st ol en ha nd gu n of fere d fo r

s a le by a pe rs on na m ed “ Ada m .” Ferg el la te r to ld Offi cer St ei n th at h e t h o u g h t

The Hon or ab le Dan ie l L. Hov la nd

, Unite d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 2

of Nort h Dak ot a.

-2

-Ada m ’s la st na m e was “ W in as ke .” Ferg el al so in fo rm ed Offi cer St ei n th at Ada m was

a reg is te red sex off

en de r who ha d b een co nv ic te d o f co rru pt io n o f a m in or an d was

cu rren tl y be in g su pe rv is ed by a pr ob at io n of fic er na m ed Bri an W ei ge l. Offi cer St ei n

in ve st ig at ed Ferg el ’s le ad s an d co nf irmed t h a t a .38 -cal ib er ha nd gu n ha d rece nt ly

be en rep or te d st ol e n f

r o m a c ar in Bi sm arck ap pr ox im at el y two bl oc ks fro m whe re

Ada m Wi n a r s k e, a reg is te red se x of fen de r co nv ic te d of co rru pt io n of a m in or , was

res id in g. Alt ho ug h Ferg el was in co rrec t ab ou t th e ex act sp el li ng of W in ars ke ’s la st

na m e an d ab ou t th e na m e of W in ars ke ’s pr ob a t i on of fic er, Ferg el ha d co rrec tl y

id en ti fie d fact s ab ou t Wi n ars ke ’s cri m in al hi st or y an d su pe rv is io n st at us

. Offi cer

St ei n la te r te st ifi ed at th e su pp res si on he ari ng he ld by th e di st ric t co ur t th at he kn ew

Wi na rs ke was pr oh ib it ed fro m po ss es si ng fir earm s du e to hi s pr io r fe l o n y

co nv ic ti on s.

W in ars ke ag reed to m eet Ferg el to co nd uc t th e sa le of th e fir earm on Ju ne 29

, 20 11

, at 1: 00 p.m

. in th e pa rk in g lo t of a sh op pi ng m al l. In ad va nc e of th e m eet in g,
Ferg el ad vi se d po li ce a s to th e m eet in g ti m e an d pl ace; th e co lo r, m ak e, an d m od el

of W in ars ke ’s ve hi cl e; an d th e fact th at W in ar s k e ’s gi rlf rie nd wou ld be pr es en t.

Offi cer St ei n an d ot he r of fic ers th en se t up su rv ei ll an ce at th e ap po in te d m eet in g si te

an d wai te d fo r W in ars ke to ap pe ar. Ju st be fo re 1 :0 0 p .m ., offi cers ob se rv ed a m al e

l a t er id en ti fie d as W in ars ke an d a fem al e la te r id en ti fie d as W in ars ke ’s gi rl f r i e n d

ap pr oa ch th e m eet in g area an d en te r a ve hi cl e th at m at ch ed th e de sc rip ti on pr ev io us ly

pr ov id ed by Ferg el

. Si nc e Ferg el ha d rem ai ne d be h i n d a t po li ce he ad qu art ers , of fic ers co nf

irmed W in ars ke ’s id en ti ty pr io r to arre st th ro ug h two so ur ces who were

pr es en t at th e sc en e: W in ars ke ’s su pe rv is in g pr ob at io n of fic er, Ton y So up ir, an d

Offi cer Mi ke Bo lm e, who was fam il ia r wit h W in ars ke fro m pr ev io us en co un te rs wit h

la w enf or cem en t.

Onc e So up ir an d Bo lm e po si ti ve ly id en ti fie d W in ars ke

, po li ce ad va nc ed on th e

ve hi cl e wit h w e ap on s dr awn

. W in ars ke an d hi s gi rlf rie nd were rem ov ed fro m th e

ve hi cl e an d pa tt ed do wn by o f f i c e r s

. W in ars ke was th en ha nd cu ffed an d read hi s

-3

-M

i r a n d a rig ht s. Afte rward , Of

fic er St ei n as ke d W in ars ke if th ere was a gu n in t h e

car, an d W in ars ke ad m it te d th at a .38 -cal ib er rev ol ve r was lo cat ed in a bl ue ba g

be hi nd th e pa ss en ge r’s se at

. Offi cers th en se arch ed th e car an d pr om pt ly lo cat ed bo th

th e weap on an d s om e am m un it io n, wh ic h Win ars ke co nf irmed were h is

.

Afte r W in ars ke was ch arg ed , h e m ov e d t o s u pp res s th e gu n an d am m un it io n

se iz ed fro m th e v e h ic le

, arg ui ng th at th e it em s were se iz ed wit ho ut a warra nt in

vi ol at io n of hi s Fo ur th Am en dm en t rig ht s. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed th e su pp res si on

m ot io n a nd al lo wed bo th th e fir earm an d am m un it io n t o b e in tro du ced as e vi de nc e.

Su bs eq ue nt ly, W in ars ke en te red a co nd it io na l gu il ty pl ea to th e pe nd in g ch arg e an d

res erv ed th e rig ht to ap pe al th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on reg ard in g th e su pp res si on of

ev id en ce.

W in ars ke no w arg ue s on ap pe al t h a t po li ce im pr op erl y ba se d th ei r pr ob ab le

cau se de te rm in at io n on in fo rm at io n su pp li ed by an un te st ed

, u n r e l ia bl e in fo rm an t.

Bec au se of

th is , W in ars ke co nt en ds th at th e se arch of h is ve hi cl e wit ho ut a warra nt

was m ad e in vi ol at i o n o f th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t, an d th e weap on an d am m un it io n

th at were re co ve red du rin g t he sea rch m us t b e su pp res se d.

II.

W e rev ie w de no vo a di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of a m ot io n to su pp res s ev id en ce,

“ ev al ua ti ng on ly for cl ear erro r, ho wev er, an y fin di ng s o f fac t b y

th e tr ia l co ur t an d

gi vi ng ap pr op ria te de fere nc e to th e in fere nc es ap pa ren tl y dr awn fro m th os e fact s by

l a w en fo rcem en t of

fic ers

. . . an d th e tri al co ur t.” Uni te d St at es v. Smi th

, 26 6 F

. 3 d

90 2, 9 04 (8t h C ir. 2 00 1) (qu ot at io n o m it te d)

.

-4

-A.

W in ars ke arg ue s th at of

fic ers la ck ed pr ob ab le cau se ei th er to arres t hi m or to

se arch hi s g irl fri en d’s v eh ic le . W e fi rs t ex am in e whe th er t he re was pr ob ab le cau se

to arre st W in ars ke wit ho ut a warra nt

. A warra nt le s s arre st by la w en fo rcem en t is

reas on ab le wher e th ere i s p ro ba bl e cau se to be li ev e th at so m eo ne ha s co m m it te d o r

is co m m it ti n g a c rime. Deven pe ck v. Alf

or d

, 54 3 U.S. 14 6, 15 2 (2 00 4)

. “ To

de te rm in e whe th er an of

fic er ha d pr ob ab le cau se to arre st an in di vi du al

, we ex am in e

th e ev en ts le ad in g up to th e arre st

, an d th en de ci de whe th er th es e hi st or i c a l f act s,

vi ewed fro m th e s t a n d po in t of an ob jecti ve ly reas on ab le po li ce of fic er, am ou nt to

pr ob ab le cau se .” Mar

yl an d v. Pri ng le

, 54 0 U.S. 36 6, 37 1 (2 00 3) (in te rn al qu ot at io n

om it te d)

.

Arres ti ng off

ic ers are no t req ui red to wit ne ss act ua l cr im in al act iv it y or h av e

co ll ect e d e n o u g h ev id en ce so as to jus ti fy a co nv ic ti on fo r th ere to be a le gi ti m at e

fin di ng of pr ob ab le cau se to jus ti fy a warra nt le ss a r r e s t

. Uni te d St at es v. W eb st er , 6 2 5 F.3 d 43 9, 44 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). In st ead

, th e m ere “ pr ob ab il it y or su bs ta n t i a l

ch an ce of cri m in al act iv it y , rat he r th an an act ua l sh owi ng of cri m in al act iv it y ,” is al l

th at is req ui red

. Uni te d St at es v. Men do za , 42 1 F.3 d 66 3, 66 7 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 0 5 )

. In

m ak in g a pr ob ab le cau se de te rm in at io n, “ [l]aw en fo rcem en t of fic ers ha ve su bs ta nt ia l

la ti tu de in in te rp ret in g an d dr awin g in fere nc es fro m fact ua l ci rcu m st an ces .” Uni te d

St at es v. Hen de rs on , 61 3 F.3 d 11 77

, 1 1 8 1 ( 8 t h Ci r. 20 10 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io n

om it te d)

.

The di st ric t co ur t co rrec tl y co nc lu de d th at

, ba se d on th e in fo rm at io n pr ov id ed

by Ferg el

, p o l i c e h ad pr ob ab le cau se to arre st W in ars ke fo r il le ga ll y po ss es si ng a

fir earm

. “ W he n an in fo rm an t ha s pr ov id ed rel ia bl e in fo rm at io n in th e pa st or whe re

h i s t ip was in de pe nd en tl y co rro bo rat ed

, a co ur t m ay de em th e in fo rm an t’s ti p

su ffi ci en tl y rel ia bl e to su pp or t a pr ob a b l e c au se de te rm in at io n.” Uni te d St at es v.

Ca sw el l

, 43 6 F.3 d 89 4, 89 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ). “ An in fo rm an t m ay es ta bl is h th e

-5

-rel ia bi li ty of hi s in fo rm at io n by es ta bl is hi ng a tra ck reco rd of p r o v i d i n g accu rat e

in fo r mat i o n

. ” Uni te d St at es v. Bro wn , 49 F.3 d 13 46

, 13 49 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ) (ci ti ng

Ill in oi s v. Gat es , 46 2 U.S. 21 3, 23 3 (19 83 )). Howev er, if an in fo rm an t i s ot he rwis e

un kn own to po li ce an d ha s no pr ov en tra ck reco rd of rel ia bi li ty, po li ce m ay de em an

in fo rm an t cred ib le an d m ak e a fin di ng of pr o ba bl e cau se whe n an in fo rm an t’s

in fo rm at io n is at le as t pa rtl y co rro bo rat ed

. Id

. An in fo rm an t m ay al so pr ov e hi m se lf

to be a rel ia bl e so ur ce fo r la w en fo rcem en t by pr ov id in g pr ed ic ti ve in fo rm at io n ab ou t

a m eet in g ti m e or pl ace. Bro wn , 49 F.3 d at 1 3 4 9 (in fo rm an t’s pr ed ic ti on th at

de fen da nt wou ld arri ve at a pa rti cu la r lo cat io n in crea se d pr ob ab il it y th at ot he r

in fo rm at io n pr ev io us ly pr ov id ed by in fo rm an t was al so co rrec t); Uni te d St at es v.

Ta yl or , 10 6 F.3 d 80 1, 8 0 3 ( 8 th Ci r. 19 97 ) (co nf id en ti al in fo rm an t wit h a cri m in al

reco rd who se rel ia bi li ty w as ot he rwis e u nk no wn t o p ol ic e es ta bl is he d re li ab il it y by

co rrec tl y pr ed ic ti ng da te an d lo cat io n of dr ug tra n s a c ti on ); Uni te d St at es v.

Rod ri gu e z , 41 4 F.3 d 83 7, 84 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (p ro ba bl e cau se es ta bl is he d by

de fen da nt ap pe ari ng at c or rect ti m e an d p la ce fo r sc he du le d d ru g t ran sa ct io n)

.

Here, po li ce ha d am

pl e cau se to fin d Ferg el to be a rel ia bl e in fo rm an t. Fi rs t,

Ferg el es ta bl is he d a tra ck reco rd of pr ov id in g accu rat e in fo rm at io n on lo cal cri m in al

act iv it y to la w en fo rcem en t. Seco nd

, earl y in th e in ve st ig at io n he pro vi de d cert ai n 3

id en ti fy in g in fo rm at io n ab ou t W in ars ke th at was in de pe nd en tl y co rro bo rat ed by

po li ce, i nc lu di ng W in ars ke ’s firs t an d l as t n am es , cri m in al hi st or y , and su pe rv is io n

Alt ho ug h W in ars ke m ak es m uc h of Ferg el ’s cri m in al hi st or y an d arg ue s th at 3

Fe rg el ’s ba ck gr ou nd ren de rs hi m an un rel ia bl e so ur ce, W in ars ke do es no t di sp ut e th at Ferg el su pp li ed accu rat e in fo rm at io n to la w e nf or cem en t ab ou t cr im es tak in g p la ce in th e Bi sm arck area , in cl ud in g de ta il s in vo lv in g dr ug tra ffi c k i ng act iv it y an d a

nu m be r of ho me b u r g l a r ie s. Tha t Ferg el m ay ha ve pa rti ci pa te d in th e bu rg la ry

act iv it y he rep or te d to po li ce is irr el ev an t to an an al y si s of Ferg el ’s cred ib il it y as an in fo rm an t. W e, li ke th e di st ric t co ur t, are pe rs ua de d th at Ferg el was a rel ia bl e so ur ce, in pa rt be cau se hi s ti ps were accu rat e en ou gh to le ad po l i ce to so lv e ab ou t a do zen

op en bu rg la ry

cas es

.

-6

-st at us

. Thi rd

, Ferg el pr ov id ed pr ed ic ti ve in fo rm at io n ab ou t th e ti m e an d pl ace of a 4

pl an ne d m eet in g wi th W in ars ke to en ga ge in cri m in al act iv it y

.

Giv en th e to ta li ty o f th e ci rcu m st an ces in th is cas e, it was re as on ab le for law

en fo rcem en t to be li ev e th at th ere was a t le as t a pr ob ab il it y or su bs ta nt ia l ch an ce of

cri m in al act iv it y oc cu rri ng whe n Win ars ke arri ve d a t t he pl ace and ti m e de si gn at ed

by Ferg el to tra ns act a fir earm sa le

. Acco rd in gl y , we fin d th at W in ars ke ’s warra nt le ss

arre st was s up po rte d b y

pro ba bl e cau se

.

B.

Nex t we an al y ze whe th er pr ob ab le cau se ex is te d to se arch W in ars ke ’s ve hi cl e

an d se iz e th e fir earm an d am m un it io n fo un d in th e se arch

. Alt ho ug h th e di st ric t co ur t

de te rm in ed th at W in ars ke was pl aced un de r arre st at th e sc en e, pr es um ab ly fo r il le ga l

po ss es si on of a fir earm b y a c o n v ic te d fel on , W in ars ke m ai nt ai ns in hi s br ie f on

ap pe al th at “ [t]he reco rd is un cl ear whe th er W in ars ke was a c tu al ly arre st ed at th is

po in t o r, if h e was , for what .”

W in ars ke do es no t di sp ut e th at whe n po li ce en co un te red hi m in hi s ve hi cl e, th e

fo ll owi ng se qu en ce of

ev en ts oc cu rred : fir st , p ol ic e rem ov ed hi m fro m th e ve hi cl e;

se co nd

, he was ha nd cu ffed an d pa tt ed do wn; an d th i r d

, h e w a s read hi s Mir an da

rig ht s. It was on ly aft er W in ars ke ’s Mir an da warn in gs were gi ve n th at po li ce as ke d

hi m ab ou t th e fir earm

. W in ars ke th en vo lu nt ari ly ad m it te d th at th e weap on was

lo cat ed in a bl ue ba g be hi nd th e pa ss en ge r’s se at

. Co ns id eri ng th es e fact s, we ag ree

wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at a se arch of th e ve hi cl e was co ns ti tu ti on al

, as “ [p ]oli ce m ay

s e a r c h a ve hi cl e in ci de nt to a rece nt oc cu pa nt ’s arre st on ly if th e arre st ee is w i t h i n

W in ars ke po in ts ou t th at so m e of th e in fo rm at io n Ferg el pr ov id ed ab ou t hi m 4

was in co rrec t, su ch as th e sp el li ng of hi s l as t n am e an d t he na m e o f hi s s up erv is in g

pr ob at io n of

fic er. W e are p ers ua de d th at th es e erro rs are in si gn ifi can t, pa rti cu la rly

whe n m eas ur ed ag ai ns t t he accu rat e in fo rm at io n F erg el pro vi de d.

-7

-reac hi ng di st a n c e o f th e pa ss en ge r co m pa rtment at th e ti m e of th e se arch or it is

reas on ab le to be li ev e th e ve hi cl e co nt ai ns ev id en ce of th e of fen se of arre st .” Ari

zo na

v. Gan t

, 55 6 U.S. 33 2, 35 1 (2 00 9)

. Here, it was reas on ab le fo r po li ce to be li ev e th at

W in ars ke ’s gi rlf

rie nd ’s ve hi cl e co nt ai ne d ev id en ce of th e of fen se of arre st in th e fo rm

of th e fi rear m

.

Our de ci si on is no t al te red by th e po ss ib il it y th at W in ars ke was no t un de r arre st

at th e ti m e of th e se arch

. W e ha ve al read y de te rm in ed th at po li ce ha d pr ob ab le cau se

to su sp ect th at W in ars ke arri ve d at th e pr e-d et erm in ed m eet i n g p la ce an d ti m e

de si gn at ed by Ferg el wit h th e in te nt to co nd uc t a fir earm sa le

. It fo ll ows th at po li ce

ha d pro ba bl e cau se to su sp ect th at W in ars ke po ss es se d a weap on or weap on s eit he r

on hi s pe rs on or in hi s ve hi cl e at th e ti m e of th e m eet in g. Und er th e “ au t o mob il e

ex cep ti on ” to th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t, po li ce m ay co nd uc t a warra nt le ss se arch of a

ve hi cl e if th ere is pr ob ab le cau se to be li ev e th a t th e ve hi cl e co nt ai ns co nt rab an d or

ot he r ev id en ce of a cri m e. Uni te d St at es v. Ken ne dy

, 42 7 F

. 3d 11 36

, 11 40 -4 1 (8 th

Ci r. 20 05 ); se e al

so Uni te d St at es v. Hamb ri ck

, 63 0 F.3 d 74 2, 74 7 (8 t h C i r

. 20 11 )

(h ol di ng th at of

fic ers ha ve pr ob ab le cau se to sea rch a ve hi cl e u nd er t he au to m ob il e

ex cep ti on if th ey reas on ab ly be li ev e, ba se d up on a rel ia bl e so ur ce, a fai r pr ob ab il it y

ex is ts th at co nt rab an d wou ld be fo un d in th e ve hi cl e), cer t. de ni ed

, 13 1 S.Ct

. 29 19

(2 01 1)

. The po li ce in th is cas e ha d pr ob ab le cau se to be li ev e th at W in ars ke ’s

gi rlf rie nd ’s veh ic le co nt ai ne d c on tra ba nd , nam el y th e fi rear m

.

W e al so affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t ’s fin di ng th at W in ars ke ’s po st

- Mir an da

ad m is si on to po li ce ab ou t th e l o c a t i o n o f th e weap on in th e ve hi cl e pr ov id ed an

in de pe nd en t ba si s to fin d pr ob ab le cau se t o c o n du ct a se arch

. Uni te d St at es v.

McCa rt y , 61 2 F.3 d 10 20

, 10 26 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (d efen da nt ’s po st

- Mir an da ad m is si on

t h a t t h e re was m ari

juan a in hi s car es ta bl is he d pr ob ab le cau se to se arch car f o r

m ari juan a). Fo r al l of th es e reas on s th e fru it s of th e se arch can no t be su pp re s s e d

.

-8

-The di st ric t co ur t’s d en ia l o f W in ars ke ’s m ot io n t o s up pr es s i s af fir m ed

.

-9

-