2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 9-20-2005 

# U SA v . W o o d s P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-4184

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . W ood s " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 519. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/519NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 04- 4184 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. M I CH A EL SH A W N W O O D S, A ppel l ant APP EAL F ROM THE UNI TE D ST ATE S DI S TRI CT C OURT F O R T H E W E S T E R N D IS T R IC T O F P E N N S Y L V A N IA

D . C . C r i m . N o. 03- cr - 00039E D istri ct Ju d g e: T h e H o n o rab le M au ri ce B . C o h il l, Jr. Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

Sept ember13, 2005
B efor e: SL O V I T E R , B A R R Y , and SM I T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on Fi l ed Sept ember20, 2005)

OP I NI ON

B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udge A si x co un ti nd i ct m ent charged M i chael W oo ds w i t h, am on g o t her things,
m anufa ctur i ng m ethamphet ami ne. W oods fi l ed a mot i on t o s uppr es s , w hi ch the D i s t r i ct2

C our tdeni ed. W oods t hen pl ed gui l t y , condi t i oned on hi s r i ghtt o appea l the fol l ow i ng i s s ue: “Suppr es s i on of evi dence l ocat ed i n hi s barn due t o an al l eged unl aw ful s ear ch of t hatbarn. ” Supp. A pp. 19. T he D i s t r i ctC our ts ent ence d W oods t o 108 m ont hs i n pr i s on t o be fol l ow ed byt hr ee y ear s of s upervi s ed r el eas e. W oods t i m el yappea l ed. W e w ill
a f f ir m th e c o n v ic tio n a n d re m a n d f o r r e s e n te n c in g . T hi s appea l cent er s on w hetherthe D i s t r i ctC our terr ed i n concl udi ng thatthe off i cers had probab l e cause to sear ch W oo ds’ barn -- or t o b e preci se, a room i n W oo ds’ barn - - w i t houta w arr ant . W e r evi ew the deni al of a mot i on t o s uppr es s forcl earerr oras t o t he under l y i ng fac tual det erm i nat i ons , and exe r ci s e pl enaryr evi ew overthe appl i cat i on o f th e la w to th o s e f

a c ts . S e e U

n itedS ta tes v . L o c ke tt , 4 0 6 F .3 d 2 0 7 , 2 1 1 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). I n M ar ch 2003, M el ani e H ans en, a pr obat i on offi cerchar ged w i t h s upervi s i ng one D al e Spangl er , r ece i ved a phone cal l fr om Spangl er ’ s gi r l fr i end, T err yH art , w ho in f o rm e d H a n se n th a t sh e h a d k ick e d S p a n g ler o u t o f h e r h o u se . S p a n g ler h a d n o t to ld H a n s e n o f

h is n e w a d d re s s a n d d id n o t s h o w u p f o r a s c h e d u le d a p p o in tm e n t w ith h e r. O n t he dayof the mi s s ed appoi nt m ent , H artcal l ed t o t el l H ans en thatSpangl erw as us i ng d ru g s a n d w a s n o w liv in g w ith W o o d s. S e v e ra l d a y s la ter , H a rt a g a in c a lled , this tim e to te ll h e r t h a t S p a n g le r w a s th e n a t W o o d s ’ r e s id e n c e . A r m ed w i t h t hi s know l edge of Spangl er ’ s w her eabout s , and bec aus e Spangl erhadT h e o f f ice rs h a d p ro b a b le c a u se to b e liev e th a t S p a n g ler h a d v io late d th e ter m s o f h is 1 pr obat i on. T hi s i s noti n di s put e. A m ong ot hervi ol at i ons , Spangl erm i s s ed a s chedul ed m e e tin g w ith h is p ro b a tio n o f f ice r, an d , u n d e r P e n n sy lv a n ia la w , this e n tit led h is p ro b a tio n o f

f ic e r t o im m e d ia te ly ar re s t h im w ith o u t a w a rr a n t. 6 1 P .S . § 3 0 9 .1 . 3 vi ol at ed pr obat i on, t he dec i s i on w as m ade t o arr es thi m . H ans en, hers upervi s or , another 1 pr obat i on offi cer , and a Penns y l vani a St at e Troope rw entt o H art ’ s hous e. H artt ol d them t hats he had j us ts poken t o Spangl erand thathe w as atW oods ’ hous e, pr obabl yi n t he barn. She s t at ed thatt her e w er e appr oxi m at el yei ghtadul t s and s om e j uveni l es atthe hous e, a l otof tr aff

i c, and “a pos s i bl e met h l ab. ” A 49. T he l ocal cons t abl e arr i ved and i nform ed the off

i cer s t hathe, t oo, w as aw ar e of a l otof tr aff i c and drug act i on goi ng on at th e h o u s e . H ar tl ed the off

i cer s bycart o W oods ’ pr oper t y . Spangl er ’ s truck w as i n t he d ri v e w a y . T h e o f

f ic e rs c a lle d f

o r b a c k -u p , a n d o n c e it a rr iv e d , b ro k e in to tw o g ro u p s . O ne gr oup s ur r ounded the hous e, w hi l e the othergr oup appr oache d t he barn, beca us e, as H a n s e n e x p la in e d , th is w a s w h e re s h e h a d b e e n to ld th a t S p a n g le r w a s p ro b a b ly sta y in g . T h e tea m th a t ap p ro a c h e d th e b a rn id e n tifie d th e m se lv e s, a n d o rd e re d S p a n g ler to c o me o u t . Th e yd i d n o th e a ra r e s p o n s e , a n d e n t e r e d th e b a r n . On c e i n s i d e , W o o d s c a me o u t of a ro o m o n the u p p er lev el an d ask ed the o ff icers w h at w as g o ing o n . T h e o ff icers
or der ed W oods ont o t he gr ound, handcuf fed hi m , and as ked hi m w her e theycoul d fi nd Spangl er . W oods s ai d t hatSpangl erw as i n t he hous e. T he St at e Troope rw enti nt o t he
r oom t hatW oods had j us texi t ed t o s ee i f any one el s e w as ther e. W hen the Troope r4

emer ged, he s ai d “I s m el l m eth i n her e; he’ s cooki ng m eth. I s ee methamphet ami ne. ” A 8 7 . S h o rt ly th e re a f

te r, S p a n g le r w a s f

o u n d in th e h o u s e a n d p la c e d u n d e r a rr e s t. Spangl ert ol d t he off

i cer s t hathe had be en s t ay i ng atW oods ’ hous e, and thatW oods had “tur ned me ont o l i nes of m eth a fe w t i m es dow ns t ai r s i n t he barn, ” butthathe w as not al l ow ed ups t ai r s . A 90. A r m ed w i t h thi s i nform at i on, and the Troope r ’ s obs ervat i ons of t he met h l ab i n t he ups t ai r s r oom , a s ear ch w arr antw as obt ai ned and the evi dence w hi ch l ed t o W oods ’ arr es tand i ndi ctm ents ei zed. O n appea l , W oods ar gues t hatthe D i s t r i ctC our terr ed i n fi ndi ng thatthe
w a rra n tles s s e a rc h o f

th e b a rn w a s a law f

u l p ro tec tiv e sw e e p . W e n o te th a t th e o n ly
w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h w a s t h a to f t h e r o o m i n th e b a r n f

r o m w h i c h Wo o d s e m e r g e d . We
n o t e , a s we l l , t h a ti ta p p e a r s t h a ta l l o rv i r tu a l l ya l l o f th e e v i d e n c e a g a i n s tW o o d s c a me f ro m th a t r o o m a n d n o t e ls e w h e re in th e b a rn . T h e S u p rem e C o u rth as h eld th at th e p o li ce ca n n o t enter the reside n ce o f a thir d par t yt o s ear ch foran i ndi vi dual s ubj ectt o arr es t , unl es s theyhave a s epar at e s ear ch
w a rr a n t to d o s o . St eagald v. U ni t ed Stat es , 4 5 1 U .S . 2 0 4 , 2 0 5 -0 6 (1 9 8 1 ). T h e C o u rt, h o w ev er, no ted th at th ere are so m e e x ce p ti o n s to this rule, suc h as w h en the th ir d p e rs o n ’s h o m e is , in f

a c t, th e re s id e n c e o f

th e p e rs o n th a t th e p o lic e s e e k to a rr e s t. See i d.
a t 2 2 1 ; se e a lso Sh e a v . Sm ith , 9 6 6 F .2 d 1 2 7 , 1 3 1 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 2 ) (p o lice a rm e d w ith pr obabl e ca us e ca n ent era thi r d par t y ’ s hom e w i t houta s ear ch w arr anti f theybel i eve the
s u s p e c t r e s id e s th e re ).5

H er e, t he off

i cer s had a r eas onabl e bel i ef thatSpangl erw as r es i di ng w i t h W oods beca us e hi s gi r l fr i end t ol d t hem so, and had t ol d t hem t hathe w as pr obabl ys t ay i ng i n the b a rn . A d d iti o n a lly , w h e n th e o f f ice rs a rriv e d a t th e W o o d s’ p ro p e rty , S p a n g ler ’s v e h icle
w as i n the dri vew ay . N o search w arr ant w as necessarybefo re theycou l d en t er W oo ds’ b a r n t o l o o k f

o ra n d a r r e s tS p a n g l e ra n d , th e g o v e r n me n t ’ s s u g g e s t i o n t o th e c o n t r a r y , we d o n o t u n d e rs ta n d W o o d s to b e s e ri o u s ly ch a lle n g in g th e e n tr yits e lf. B ut, say s W oo ds, even i f t he o ffi cers cou l d h ave en t ered the b arn t o arr est Spangl er , t heydi d nothave the r i ghtt o s ear ch the barn underthe pr et extof a pr ot ect i ve s w eep. W e nee d notdeci de w hetherther e w as a “pr ot ect i ve s w eep” her e, and i f s o, w hetheri tw as l aw ful . W e nee d onl yfi nd that , i tbei ng undi s put ed that , under P e n n sy lv a n ia la w , the o f f ice rs h a d th e a u th o rityto a rre st S p a n g ler , u n til th e p o in t o f h is
a rr e s t th e yh a d th e ri g h t to s e a rc h a n yw h e re in th e b a rn th a t h e m ig h t b e e n f o u n d . See Ma ry la n d

v . B u ie , 4 9 4 U . S . 3 2 5 , 3 3 0 (19 9 0 ). B ec au se, th ere fo re, th e T roo p er’s en try into the roo m in w h ich th e m eth lab w as f o u n d w as law fu l, the D istri ct C o u rtd id n o t err in d e n y in g th e m o tio n to s u p p re s s th e e v id e n c e e m a n a tin g th e re f ro m . W e w i l l aff

i r m t he convi ct i on, vaca t e the s ent ence , and r emand forr es ent enci ng u n d er U ni t ed Stat es v. B ooker , 5 4 3 U .S . _
__ , 1 2 5 S .C t. 7 3 8 (2 0 0 5 ).