Court Opinion

ID: 9838194
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-05 17:01:26.194569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:35:08.043212
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         SEP 5 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    22-10194

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No.
                                                2:21-cr-00013-KJD-BNW-1
 v.

GEORGE ORVILLE TURNER, Jr.,                     MEMORANDUM*

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Nevada
                    Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding

                      Argued and Submitted August 22, 2023
                            San Francisco, California

Before: BUMATAY, KOH, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.

      George Orville Turner, Jr., appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to

suppress evidence obtained from the execution of two search warrants. The first

search warrant—the Facebook warrant—was directed at two separate Facebook

accounts, the Kizzy Chapo account and the George Turner account. The second

search warrant—the residential warrant—was directed at Turner’s home. We have

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      This court reviews the denial of a motion to suppress de novo, but it reviews

underlying factual findings for clear error. United States v. Flores, 802 F.3d 1028,

1042–43 (9th Cir. 2015) (citation omitted).

      1.     There was sufficient probable cause to support the Facebook warrant.

Probable cause requires “a fair probability,” based on the information contained in

the affidavit, “that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular

place.” Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983). Here, posts on the Kizzy Chapo

account encouraged those interested in purchasing forged documents to message the

account. Because the account advertised these sales through posts, including

photographs and videos, there was probable cause to search the Kizzy Chapo

account. In addition, the issuing judge had a substantial basis to draw a reasonable

inference that evidence of forgery would be found in the George Turner account.

Specifically, there was evidence that the Kizzy Chapo account was selling forged

documents and that the George Turner account was controlled by the same person.

Taken together, the facts contained in the officer’s affidavit constituted sufficient

probable cause to support the warrant.

      2.     Even assuming the Facebook warrant was overbroad and lacked the

requisite specificity, any deficiency was cured through the warrant’s incorporation

of the officer’s affidavit. We “consider an affidavit to be part of a warrant, and

                                         2                                    22-10194
therefore potentially curative of any defects, ‘only if (1) the warrant expressly

incorporated the affidavit by reference and (2) the affidavit either is attached

physically to the warrant or at least accompanies the warrant while agents execute

the search.’” United States v. SDI Future Health, Inc., 568 F.3d 684, 699 (9th Cir.

2009) (quoting United States v. Kow, 58 F.3d 423, 429 n.3 (9th Cir. 1995)). Absent

evidence that an affidavit accompanied or was attached to a warrant at the time the

warrant was executed, the “fact that the warrant states that the affidavit is both

attached and incorporated by reference is insufficient to permit us to conclude that

the affidavit accompanied the warrant at the time of the search.” United States v.

Hotal, 143 F.3d 1223, 1225 (9th Cir. 1998). Here, the district court found that both

prongs were satisfied because (1) the warrant expressly incorporated the affidavit,

and (2) the affidavit was available during the search. These findings are supported

by the record and, therefore, the trial court did not err by holding that the Facebook

warrant’s incorporation of the affidavit cured any defects as to its specificity.

      3.     The residential warrant was supported by probable cause. The issuing

judge had a substantial basis to conclude that probable cause supported the search of

Turner’s home for evidence of forgery-related offenses, unlawful possession of a

firearm, and drug possession. See United States v. Gourde, 440 F.3d 1065, 1071 (9th

Cir. 2006) (en banc). Specifically, the affidavit described the particular devices used

for the forgeries, like a computer, and it is reasonable to infer that Turner kept such

                                           3                                    22-10194
devices in his home. Similarly, the affidavit detailed Turner’s previous arrest for

unlawful possession of a firearm, Turner’s Facebook message and post which

showed he was “working on” obtaining a firearm, and the agent’s experience with

unlawful firearms often being kept in a defendant’s home. And the affidavit detailed

the marijuana videos and photo of MDMA that Turner publicized on Facebook and

the agent’s experience with evidence of drug possession often being maintained in a

defendant’s home. A substantial basis existed to support the search of Turner’s home

for evidence of forgery and unlawful firearm and drug possession.

      Because we find that the warrants were supported by probable cause and that

the Facebook warrant was not overbroad given that the accompanying affidavit was

incorporated, we do not address whether the agents acted in good faith and in

reasonable reliance on the warrants.

      AFFIRMED.

                                         4                                   22-10194