Opinion
Case No. 2:19-cr-107-KOB-HNJ
02-03-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY BERNARD BROWN, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Defendant in this case moved to suppress evidence, including drugs and a firearm, found in his car during a warrantless search. (Doc. 13). He also moved to suppress statements made during his arrest because he was not read his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). (Id.).
After initial briefing on the motion to suppress, the magistrate judge conducted a hearing and allowed supplemental briefing. The magistrate judge entered an extensive Report and Recommendation, in which he recommended granting the Defendant's motion to suppress statements because the government conceded that the Defendant had not been read his Miranda rights. (Doc. 27). However, the magistrate judge recommended denying the Defendant's motion to suppress evidence found in his car because probable cause supported the search, or, alternatively, the inevitable discovery and inventory search exceptions to the Fourth Amendment applied.
The Defendant filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 29). In his objections, the Defendant argues that the magistrate judge was incorrect in concluding that probable cause justified the search of the Defendant's car because only one officer testified that he smelled marijuana, while the other two officers thought that the search of the car was an inventory search. However, the credible testimony of the officer who said that he smelled marijuana, coupled with body camera footage showing the officer asking a passenger if she had been smoking weed, supports the magistrate judge's conclusion that, based on Eleventh Circuit law, probable cause justified the warrantless search of the Defendant's car. Thus, the court OVERRULES the Defendant's objections to the magistrate judge's finding of probable cause. Further, because the court finds probable cause to search the car, the court need not address the magistrate judge's alternative finding that the search of the Defendant's car was justified under the inevitable discovery and inventory search exceptions to the Fourth Amendment.
After reviewing the entire file, including the Report and Recommendation, the Defendant's objections, all of the briefs, and the transcript of the hearing conducted by the magistrate judge, the court ADOPTS IN PART the report of the magistrate judge, to the extent that the magistrate judge recommends that the motion to suppress statements be granted and that the motion to suppress evidence be denied based on probable cause, and ACCEPTS his recommendation. Accordingly, the court finds that the motion to suppress is due to be granted in part and denied in part.
For the reasons contained in the Report and Recommendation, (doc. 27), the court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the motion to suppress, (doc. 13).
DONE and ORDERED this 3rd day of February, 2020.
/s/_________
KARON OWEN BOWDRE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE