# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 6- 40 91

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
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.

Ja m es Jo se ph Tho m

ps on

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 Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta - Sio ux Fal ls

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Octo be r 20 , 20 17 Fil ed : Fe br ua ry

2, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s, an d GOLDBERG, Ju dg e. 1

__ __ __ __ __ __ SHEPHERD, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

Fo ll owi ng an Aug us t 2 0 1 6 ju r y tri al
, Ja m es Tho m ps on was co nv ic te d of

po ss es si on wit h i nt en t t o d is tri bu te a co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc e in vi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C.

The Hon or ab le Ri ch ard W

. Go l d b e r g , Ju dg e fo r th e Uni te d St at es Co ur t of 1 In te rn at io na l Trad e, si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.§ 84 1( a)(1 ). Tho m ps on ap pe al s hi s co nv ic ti on

. Fo r th e reas on s se t fo rth be lo w, we affi rm

.

I. Back gr ou nd

In Ju ly 20 15
, Si ou x Fal ls po li ce rece iv ed an an on y m ou s ti p th at Tho m ps on was di st rib ut in g co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc es

. W hi le su rv ei ll in g Tho m ps on ’s res id en ce, po li ce

no ti ced a ga rb ag e co nt ai ne r in th e dr iv eway, lo cat ed be twee n th e ga rag e do or an d th e
pe de st ria n do or en tra nc e to th e ga rag e. Po li ce th en co nt act ed Tho m ps on ’s ga rb ag e 2

c o ll ect io n se rv ic e to co nd uc t a co nt ro ll ed tra sh pu ll

. On a reg ul arl y -s ch ed u l e d d a y of co ll ect io n, po l i c e w a tc he d th e ga rb ag e co ll ect or ret rie ve Tho m ps on ’s ga rb ag e

co nt ai ne r fro m it s lo cat io n in Tho m ps on ’s dr iv eway by th e ga rag e do or an d du m p it s

co nt en ts in th e em

pt y co ll ect io n area of th e tru ck

. Po li ce th en ret rie ve d th e tra sh fro m th e tr uc k a nd sea rch ed it , f in di ng se ve ral dr

ug -rel at ed it em s. The p ol ic e co nd uc te d

a si m il ar tra sh pu ll th e fo ll owi ng week
, whi ch rev eal ed ad di ti on al dr ug -rel at ed it em s

an d a rece ip t fo r a st or ag e un it

. Bas ed on th es e tr as h p ul ls —as well as i nf or m at io n

rece iv ed fro m an in fo rm an t— po li ce ob ta in ed a se arc h warra nt fo r Tho m ps on ’s

res idenc e, w he re th ey fo un d 19 gr am s of m et ha m ph et am in e in si de a lo ck bo x, $2 6,0 63 in cas h hi dd en in si de an ot to m an , an d dr ug pa rap he rn al ia

. Po li ce la te r ob ta in ed a

se arch warra nt fo r Tho m

ps on ’s st or ag e un it in Luv ern e, Mi nn es ot a, whi ch co nt ai ne d

an ad di ti on al 11 5.1 gra m s o f m et ha m ph et am in e an d $ 36 ,95 0 i n c as h.

Pri or to tri al
, Tho m

ps on m ov ed to s u p p r e s s al l ev id en ce ob ta in ed fro m th e

se ar ch es , cl ai m ing th e warra nt s were ba se d on un co ns ti tu ti on al tra sh pu ll s. Fo ll owin g

Tho m ps on ’s r es id en ce ha s a do ub le ga rag e wit h on e ga rag e d oo r, as well as 2

a pe de st ria n do or en tra nc e in to th e ga rag e lo cat ed be twee n t he ga rag e do or an d th e

m ai n en t r an ce of th e ho m e. A la rg e dr iv eway si ts in fro nt of th e ho m e, an d a walk way pa ss es in fro nt of t he pe de st ria n d oo r of th e ga rag e on it s way

to th e m ai n

en tra nc e o f th e h om e.

-2

-an ev id en ti ary he ari ng , th e m ag is tr a te jud ge reco m m en de d de nyin g Tho m

ps on ’s

m ot io n to su pp res s be cau se no tre sp as s oc cu rred or , al te rn at iv el y , be cau se Tho m ps on di d no t ha ve an ob

jecti ve ly reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n o f pr iv acy in th e tra sh

. The

m ag is tra te jud ge al so fo un d th at pr ob ab le cau se ex is te d fo r th e se arch warra nt s ev en ab s e n t t h e in fo rm at io n ob ta in ed fro m th e tra sh pu ll s an d, ev en if th e warra nt s were in va li d, th e Leo n go od fai th ex cep ti on ap pl ie d. See Uni te d St at es v. Leo n, 46 8 U.S.
89 7 (1 98 4)

. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed Tho m ps on ’s m ot io n to su pp res s, ad op ti ng th e 3

m ag is tra te jud ge ’s rep or t an d reco m m en da ti on in pa rt by ag reei ng th at Tho m ps on di d

no t ha ve an ob

jecti ve ly reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy in th e tra sh an d th at , ev en wit ho ut th e tra sh pu ll s, th ere was pr ob ab le cau se fo r th e se arch warra nt s. Tho m ps on

was co nv ic te d fo ll owi ng a jury tria l an d s en te nc ed to 15 0 m on th s i m pr is on m en t.

II. Tras h P ul ls

Tho m ps on fir st ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of hi s m ot io n to su pp res s. W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s fact ua l fin di ng s fo r cl ear erro r an d it s le ga l co nc lu si on s de no vo

. Uni te d St at es v. Farn el l, 70 1 F.3 d 25 6, 26 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ). W e wil l “ affi rm [th e] or de r de nyin g [Tho m ps on ’s] m ot io n to su pp res s un le ss th e de ci si on is

un su pp or te d by su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce, is ba se d on an erro ne ou s vi ew of th e ap pl ic ab le
la w, or in li gh t of th e en ti re reco rd
, we are le ft wit h a fir m an d de fin it e co nv ic ti on th at

a m is ta ke ha s be en m ad e.” Id

. at 2 6 0

- 6 1 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

.

The Fo ur th Am en dm en t pr ot ect s “ [t]he rig ht of th e pe op le to be se cu re in th ei r
pe rs on s, ho us es , pa pe rs , an d effe ct s, ag ai ns t un reas on ab le se arch es an d se iz ur es

. . . .”
U.S. Co ns t

. a men d

. IV. A warra nt le ss se arch of an in di vi du al ’s tra sh vi ol at es th e

The Hon or ab le Karen E. Sch rei er, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 3 of So ut h Dak ot a , ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco m m en da ti on s of th e Hon or ab le Vero ni ca L. Duf

fy
, Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct of So ut h Dak ot a.

-3

-Fo ur th Am en dm en t on ly whe re th e in d i v i d u al ha s a “ su bjec ti ve ex pe ct at io n of

pr iv acy in [th e] g arb ag e th at so ci et y acce pt s as ob

jecti ve ly rea so na bl e.” Cal ifo rn ia
v. Gre en woo d, 4 86 U.S. 35 , 39 (19 88 ).

It is well es ta bl is he d th at th ere is no reas on ab le “ ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy in tra sh le ft fo r co ll ec t i o n i n an area acce ss ib le to th e pu bl ic .” Id . a t 41

. Tho m ps on arg ue s th at be cau se th e tra sh was le ft in a co n t a i n e r ne xt to hi s ga rag e—r at he r th an on a

s t r e e t c u rb —t he tra sh was wit hi n th e cu rti la ge of hi s ho m e an d th us he ret ai n e d a

reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy in i t

. Yet, as su m in g th e tra sh was wit hi n th e

cu r t i la ge of Tho m

ps on ’s ho m e, “ th e pr op er fo cu s un de r Green woo d [rem ai ns ] whe th er th e ga rb ag e was read il y acce ss ib le to th e pu bl ic so as to ren de r an y

ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy ob jecti ve ly un reas on ab le .” Uni te d St at es v. Co mea ux , 95 5
F.2 d 5 86 , 58 9 (8 th Cir . 19 92 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

The di s t ric t co ur t fo un d th at Tho m ps on ’s t ras h was read il y acce ss ib le to th e
pu bl ic

. W e ag ree. The t r a s h was pl aced in a lo cat io n fro m whi ch th e ga rb ag e

co ll ect or s reg ul arl y co ll ect ed it at th e reg ul arl y -s ch ed ul ed ti m e of co ll ect io n,

su gg es ti ng it was pl aced th ere “ fo r th e ex pr es s pu rp os e of ha vi ng st ran ge rs ta ke it .”
See Green woo d, 48 6 U.S. at 40 -4 1. Pres um ab ly, th es e st r a n g e r s m ig ht “ so rt[ ] th ro ug h [th e] tra sh or pe rm it [] ot h e r s , s u c h a s t h e po li ce, to do so .” Id

. at 40

. The

ga rb ag e co n t a i ne r was eas il y vi si bl e fro m th e st reet , an d th ere were no ba rri ers
pr ev en ti ng a c c e s s to th e co nt ai ne r or it s co nt en ts

. See Uni te d St at es v. Seg ur a-Ba lt azar , 44 8 F.3 d 12 81
, 12 88 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 06 ) (f in di ng no reas on ab le

ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy in tra sh co nt ai ne rs le ft ne xt to ga rag e whe re th ey were “ pl ai nl y vi si bl e an d acces si bl e fro m th e st reet ”); se e al so Uni te d Stat es v. Hedri ck
, 92 2 F.2d
39 6, 40 0 (7 th Ci r. 19 91 ) (“ [T]he ab se nc e of a fen ce or an y ot he r b a r r i e r [ is on e in di cat or ] th at th e g arb ag e was kn owi ng ly exp os ed to th e p ub li c”). Bas ed on th es e fact s, we fin d th at Tho m

ps on ha d no ob

jecti ve ly reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy

-4

-in th e tra sh

. W e th eref or e co nc lu de th at Tho m

ps on ’s m ot io n to su pp res s was pr op erl y de ni ed

.

III. Su ffi ci en cy of t he Evi de nc e

Tho m ps on ne xt cl ai m s th at th e ev id e n c e w a s i ns uf fic ie nt to sh ow th at he

po ss es se d an d in te nd ed to di st rib ut e m et ha m ph et am in e. “ W e rev ie w th e su ffi ci en cy

o f t he ev id en ce de no vo , vi ewin g ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e
go ve rn m en t, res ol v i n g co nf li ct s in th e go ve rn m en t’s fav or , an d acce pt in g al l

reas on ab le in fere nc es th at su pp or t th e ve rd ic t.” Uni te d St at e s v. Trejo, 83 1 F.3 d
10 90
, 10 93 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om i t t e d )

. “Reve rs al is

ap pr op ria te on ly whe re a reas on ab le jury co ul d no t ha ve fo un d al l th e el em en ts of th e of fen se be y on d a reas on ab le do ub t.” Id

. at 10 93 -9 4 ( i n t e r na l qu ot at io n m ark s

om it te d)

. Viewi ng th e ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t f a v o r a bl e to th e go ve rn m en t, we fin d i t s uf fic ie nt ly sup po rts Tho m

ps on ’s con vi ct io n.

To p r o ve po ss es si on wit h in te nt to di st rib ut e un de r 21 U.S.C. § 84 1( a), t h e
go ve rn m en t m

us t sh ow “ kn owi ng po ss es s i o n o f [m et ha m ph et am in e] an d th e in te nt
to di st rib ut e it .” Uni te d St at es v. Fet te rs , 69 8 F.3 d 65 3, 65 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (in te rn al

qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

. “ In te nt to di st rib ut e co nt ro ll ed su bs ta nc es m ay be pr ov ed by ei th er di rect ev id en ce or ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce.” Uni te d St at es v. Sch ub el
, 91 2
F.2 d 95 2, 95 6 (8t h Cir. 19 90 ). “ Dru g qu an ti ty an d pu rit y le ve l, dru g pa rap he rn al ia
, pr io r sa le s, an d th e pr es en ce of cas h or a fir earm su pp or t an in fere nc e of in te nt to di st rib ut e.” Fet te rs , 69 8 F .3d at 6 57

.

Here, po li ce fo un d 19 gr am s of 98 .8% pu re m et ha m ph et am in e in Tho m

ps on ’s ho m e an d 11 5.1 gr am s of 98 .9% pu re m et ha m ph et am in e in hi s st or ag e un it

. A Dru g Enfo rcem en t Adm in is tra ti on (DEA) ag en t te sti fi ed tha t the se am ount s w er e cons is te nt wit h di st rib ut io n. S e e Uni te d St at es v. Veg a, 67 6 F.3 d 70 8, 72 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 )

-5

-(“ [C]ircu m st an ti al ev id en ce su ch as dr ug qu an ti ty

. . . m ay be us ed to es ta bl is h in te nt
to di st rib ut e.”). Po li ce al so fo un d $2 6, 0 6 3 i n c a s h in an ot to m an in Tho m ps on ’s ho m e an d $3 6,9 50 in Tho m ps on ’s st or ag e un it
, as well as di gi ta l sc al es , gl as s pi pe s, he at se al ed ba gs , a nd m

ul ti pl e cel l ph on es

. The DEA ag en t te st ifi ed th at , b as ed o n hi s tra in in g an d ex pe rie nc e , t h e s e i te m s were in di cat iv e of dr ug tra ffi ck in g. See Sch ub el
, 9 1 2 F.2 d at 95 6 (“ The pr es en ce of eq ui pm en t to weig h an d m eas ur e th e

na rco ti cs , par ap he rn al ia us ed to aid in th ei r di st rib ut io n, an d l arg e su m s o f cas h a re

co m m on in di ci a of d r ug tra ffi ck in g an d are al l ci rcu m st an ti al ev id en ce of in te nt to di st rib ut e.”). Mo reo ve r, Ja m es Iv y te st ifi ed th at Tho m ps on so ld hi m meth am ph et am in e on m

ul ti pl e oc cas io ns

. Tho m ps on ch al le ng es Iv y ’s cred ib il it y ba se d on an ap pa ren t co nt rad ic ti on in hi s te st im on y , bu t “ [w]itn es s cred ib il it y is wit hi n t he pro vi nc e o f th e jury an d vi rtu al ly u nr ev ie wab le on ap pe al .” Fet te rs , 69 8
F.3 d at 65 7 (in te r n a l q u o ta ti on m ark s om it te d)

. And
, ev en di sr eg ard in g th is

te st im on y , a r e a s o na bl e jury co ul d st il l ha ve de te rm in ed th at Tho m ps on po ss es se d

an d in te nd ed to di st rib ut e m e t h a mp h e ta m in e. W e th eref or e fin d th e ev id en ce

su ffi ci en t t o s up po rt Th om ps on ’s con vi ct io n.

IV. Add it io na l Ch al le ng es

In a d d i t i o n , th is Co ur t gr an te d Tho m ps on ’s req ue st to fil e a pr o se

su pp le m en ta l b rie f, whe rei n h e rai se s t en ad di ti on al arg um en ts . W e h av e rev ie wed
th es e ch al le ng es an d fi nd th em to be wit ho ut m eri t. 4

In cl ud ed in Tho m

ps on ’s pr o se cl ai m s is th e co nt en ti on th at hi s tri al co un se l 4
pr ov id ed in effe ct iv e as si st an ce. Howev er, we do no t co ns id er su ch cl ai m s on di rect ap pe al ex cep t in ex cep ti on al ci rcu m st an ces , whi ch are no t pr es en t he re. See Uni te d St at es v. Lo ok in g C lo ud , 41 9 F .3d 78 1, 7 88 -8 9 (8 th Cir . 20 05 ).

-6

-V. Con cl us io n

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af fir m

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-