Court Opinion

ID: 9375319
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-27 16:00:43.832455+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:57.462569
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30283         Document: 00516655832             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/24/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-30283
                                     Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                     ____________                              February 24, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Tylan Tilford,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Middle District of Louisiana
                                USDC No. 3:21-CR-27-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Barksdale, Higginson, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Tylan Tilford entered a conditional guilty plea to possessing a firearm
   as a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), reserving the right to appeal the
   denial of his motion to suppress evidence recovered from his residence
   pursuant to a search warrant. He contends: the district court erred by
   applying the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule because the

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30283       Document: 00516655832          Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/24/2023

                                     No. 22-30283

   affidavit for the search warrant was so lacking in probable cause that belief in
   its existence was unreasonable; and the warrant was not supported by
   probable cause.
          We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error; its legal
   conclusions, de novo. E.g., United States v. Cherna, 184 F.3d 403, 406–07 (5th
   Cir. 1999). “We review de novo the reasonableness of an officer’s reliance
   upon a warrant issued by a magistrate.” United States v. Scully, 951 F.3d 656,
   664 (5th Cir. 2020) (citation omitted). Evidence is viewed in the light most
   favorable to the prevailing party, here the Government. E.g., id.
          The affidavit provided, inter alia, the following. Law enforcement
   conducted several controlled purchases of marihuana from someone they
   suspected of drug activity. “Prior to the most recent” controlled purchase,
   officers “established surveillance” at three residences, one of those later
   identified as Tilford’s. “Approximately 30 minutes” after the confidential
   informant reached out to the suspected dealer to buy marihuana, the
   suspected dealer drove to, and entered, Tilford’s residence, and “exited
   approximately 1 minute later with a bulge in his pants”. The controlled
   purchase was then conducted, and according to the affiant: the above-
   described “activity [was] consistent with [the suspected dealer’s] patterns of
   movement during several of the previously mentioned controlled purchases
   and surveillance operations”.
          Contrary to Tilford’s contentions, the affidavit was more than
   “barebones” because it supplied specific facts regarding an investigation
   from August 2019 to March 2020 of an ongoing drug enterprise that
   supported the reasonable inference Tilford’s residence was being used as a
   stash house for that criminal activity. See United States v. May, 819 F.2d 531,
   535 (5th Cir. 1987) (“evaluating the sufficiency of [an] affidavit”
   accompanying an application for search warrant requires a “commonsense”

                                          2
Case: 22-30283      Document: 00516655832          Page: 3    Date Filed: 02/24/2023

                                    No. 22-30283

   approach and “officer may draw reasonable inferences”); United States v.
   Garcia, 27 F.3d 1009, 1014 (5th Cir. 1994) (requisite nexus between “house
   to be searched and the evidence sought” may be established “through
   normal inferences” (citation omitted)).
          Additionally, although Tilford maintains the affidavit provides the
   suspected dealer visited his residence merely once, which is insufficient to
   connect him to any criminal activity, Tilford’s residence being one of three
   locations placed under surveillance “prior to” the above-described purchase
   supports the reasonable inference that stopping at his residence was part of
   the suspected dealer’s “pattern[] of movement during several” of the
   controlled purchases.
          Therefore, Tilford’s reliance on United States v. Hython, 443 F.3d 480
   (6th Cir. 2006), is unpersuasive for reasons recognized by that panel:
   reliance on the warrant in that case might have been reasonable if the affidavit
   included allegations (like those in this instance) of an “ongoing
   investigation” into an “ongoing criminal enterprise”. Id. at 488–89.
          Reading the affidavit in the requisite commonsense manner, the
   district court did not err in applying the good-faith exception based on the
   four corners of the affidavit. E.g., United States v. Huerra, 884 F.3d 511, 515
   (5th Cir. 2018) (“A reasonable officer could have relied on [the] warrant in
   good faith.”).
          Because the good-faith exception applies, we need not address
   whether the warrant was supported by probable cause. E.g., Garcia, 27 F.3d
   at 1013.
          AFFIRMED.

                                          3