Writing "return to sender" and putting package back on porch didn't nullify Probable Cause for execution of anticipatory warrant

http://fourthamendment.com/?p=28504


Comments


[31 Points] subutextual:

So what if you grab the package while leaving the house and take it with you without bringing it inside ever...


[20 Points] throwahooawayyfoe:

W.D.Mo.: Writing “return to sender” and putting package back on porch didn’t nullify PC for anticipatory warrant

Posted on August 7, 2017 by Hall

The fact a package with drugs is coming to a particular address is enough to issue an anticipatory warrant for that address. A prior history of that address and drugs isn’t required. When the triggering condition is taking the package inside, and the package was left at the door, returning the package back outside with “return to sender” written on it doesn’t nullify the probable cause.

United States v. Brown, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120791 (W.D. Mo. July 21, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120499 (W.D. Mo. Aug. 1, 2017):

Defendant additionally argues that when the Parcel was returned outside the front door with “return to sender” written on the package, the Parcel was rejected by the occupants of the residence. As the Court has already addressed, the triggering event occurred when Defendant carried the Parcel into the residence. Nothing within the search warrant indicated that execution was conditioned on the Parcel remaining within the residence. Once the triggering event occurred, execution of the Anticipatory Search Warrant was authorized.

See United States v. Becerra, 97 F.3d 669, 671 (2d Cir. 1996) (“[A]n anticipatory warrant whose perfection requires no more than the delivery of a package to, or in the presence of, the suspect, is not invalidated because the parcel is taken off the premises after delivery.”) See also United States v. Jackson, 55 F.3d 1219, 1224 (6th Cir. 1995) (“We conclude that once the package was taken inside the Bardwell house, probable cause existed to search the premises not only for the contraband itself, but also for other evidence of drug trafficking.”).


[15 Points] None:

[deleted]


[14 Points] mrmcepic69:

It doesn't stop the warrant, because the warrant says "when fuckface takes the package inside THEN you can kick down his door". However I feel if you wrote return to sender it'll help you in court, especially if your house was clean.


[6 Points] _PrinterPam_:

IANAL and I haven't looked into the full case apart from what's posted, but: That reads as a judge's ruling to a defense motion to suppress evidence subsequent to a warrant. It's not a guilty finding concerning the package itself. Just that the package served as probable cause for a further search...not that the defendant is in trouble for the package in question. If they found other stuff, the dude is in trouble. If not, that's probably really good news for him.

Still, this is an interesting topic and worthy of following.


[3 Points] Errl-Dabstien:

No but, should you be following proper opsec, outside of the drugs in the box with "return to send on it", your drop spot is squeaky clean. The warrant gets them into the spot but, shouldn't matter at that point so long as only drugs or illegal "stuff" is in the box marked return to sender.

*make no mistake though, you're still getting arrested. You just need to rely on the fact that you did write return to sender and had a clean spot. That's what keeps you out of jail.


[4 Points] None:

[removed]


[3 Points] lawdnmthrowaway:

If you're interested in the context (from the judge's order):

In or around November of 2015, St. Louis Postal Inspectors identified a suspicious parcel in the mail stream. (Hereinafter known as the “Parcel.”) On or about November 9, 2015, Postal Inspectors retrieved the Parcel and due to its suspicious characteristics, a canine sniff was requested. On November 9, 2015, Columbia Police Department Officer Sgt. Scott Hedrick responded with his drug canine, Kane. Kane reacted to the Parcel in a positive manner. Thereafter, Postal Inspector Christopher J. Farmer applied for and obtained a federal search warrant for the Parcel. Execution of the search warrant revealed a hollowed-out book containing approximately 456 grams of field-tested methamphetamine. Upon the discovery of the Parcel containing methamphetamine, officers replaced a portion of the methamphetamine and resealed the Parcel. Postal Inspector Farmer then applied for and obtained an Anticipatory Search Warrant authorizing the search...

On November 10, 2015, in the morning hours, officers assembled for the execution of the warrant. Postal Inspector Farmer and Columbia Police Detective Tim Giger established surveillance near the residence. At 9:55 a.m., two black males exited the residence and entered a white Chevrolet Suburban parked in front of the residence. At 10:04 a.m., an undercover Postal Inspector delivered the Parcel to the residence and the Parcel was left near the front door. A black male opened and closed the door several times and looked toward the Parcel through the screen door. At 10:31 a.m., the Suburban returned, drove past the residence once, and then returned and parked in the driveway of the residence. At 10:34 a.m., the driver of the Suburban, identified as Favbion Dawayne Holmes, and Defendant, who was the passenger in the Suburban, exited the vehicle and approached the residence. Defendant picked up the Parcel and took it into the residence. At 10:36 a.m., Zachary Troy Fennell brought the Parcel back outside the residence and placed it next to the front door.

Subsequently, law enforcement officers, including the Boone County Sheriff's Department SWAT Team, approached the residence to execute the Anticipatory Search Warrant. Entry was attempted at the front door, but officers were unable to breach the front door because the door had been reinforced. Officers were forced to make entry at a secondary location at the rear of the residence. Upon execution of the Anticipatory Search Warrant, Postal Inspector Farmer retrieved the Parcel from the front door and found the words “return to sender” had been written on the package in black marker.


[1 Points] missingmandy:

Only a fucking idiot would think they could get away with this.