Youngstown Daily Legal News

Drug dealer loses appeal as court says officers executed search warrant properly

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: September 7, 2016

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that a drug dealer’s motion to suppress evidence seized during a search was properly denied because officers met the “good-faith” exception to search warrant requirements.

The decision from the federal court’s three-judge appellate panel affirmed the judgment of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denying a motion to suppress from defendant Dwight Bullard.

According to court documents, a search warrant was issued on Oct. 24, 2014 in the Court of Common Pleas of Lake County authorizing a search of a Bishop Park Drive apartment in Willoughby Hills.

The warrant was based on four controlled heroin buys conducted by the Lakewood Police Department with the help of a confidential source.

Bullard, who was under supervised probation at the time, was never caught executing a drug deal at the Bishop Park residence. Instead, he met the informant at other properties that he owned or other agreed-upon locations.

Despite the fact that the Bishop Park apartment was not listed as a residence on Bullard’s probation paperwork, Bullard was observed leaving the apartment and locking the door with a key before he made his way to conduct drug transactions.

Bullard was arrested on Oct. 28, 2014 just prior to the search of the apartment.

Police entered the residence using Bullard’s key and brought him into the apartment where 52 bags of heroin were removed from his underwear.

When asked if he was keeping drugs in the apartment, Bullard told officers that everything was in the safe and voluntarily provided police with the digital combination. He also signed an inventory of items seized from the apartment.

After he was indicted in November 2014, Bullard filed a motion to suppress the collected evidence which was denied by the district court following a hearing.

According to the district court, probable cause existed to support the issuance of the warrant as did a good-faith exception under the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Leon.

Bullard eventually pleaded guilty to possession heroin with intent to distribute and to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition.

In his appeal from the denial of his motion to suppress, Bullard contended that the affidavit supporting the search warrant did not support a finding of probable cause.

He also argued that a nexus between the place to be searched and the criminal activity was lacking, negating the district court’s finding of a good-faith exception.

“This case boils down to whether the affidavit contains some ‘modicum of evidence’ to support a connection between the Bishop Park apartment and the drug trafficking activity,” Circuit Judge Damon Keith wrote on behalf of the appellate panel. “We conclude that it does.”

According to surveillance evidence, Bullard was observed exiting the Bishop Park apartment, locking the door behind him and making a phone call to the confidential informant advising him as to where they should meet for a drug sale.

Police then followed Bullard directly to the site of the drug transaction.

A similar series of events involving text messages to the informant took place several days later.

“We have concluded that the application of the good-faith exception under similar circumstances was proper,” Keith wrote, citing several other cases in which defendants were observed traveling from a residence directly to a drug transaction.

Keith was joined by Judges Eric Clay and Helene White with White writing a separate, concurring opinion.

According to White, the good-faith analysis was unnecessary because police had probable cause to search the apartment.

“Given Bullard’s ties to the apartment, his status as a known drug dealer and the observations of Bullard leaving the apartment to engage in drug transactions, there was sufficient, reliable information presented for the (warrant) issuing judge to make the common-sense inference that drugs would be found at the Bishop Park apartment,” White wrote.

The case is cited United States v. Bullard, case No.15-3633.

[Back]