In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

neighbor. R. at 5. Then, on June 1, 2011, there was another neighborhood burglary. R. at 5. According to the Officer, the description of the burglary suspect matched the description of the burglar who killed the Convict’s neighbor. R. at 5. The Officer also stated that witnesses saw the suspect fleeing towards the Convict’s house. R. at 5. The police were going house to house, ensuring the suspect was not hiding in any neighborhood homes. R. at 5. The Officer came to the Convict’s house and asked to come inside to ask some questions because it was raining. R. at 5–6. Upon consent, the Officer entered the Convict’s living room. R. at 6. The Officer, who recognized the Convict from his sawed-off shotgun conviction, was familiar with the house’s layout and knew that the door directly across the living room led into the kitchen. R. at 6. The Officer also knew that the house had a backdoor that led from the kitchen into the backyard. R. at 6. The Officer was not afraid of the Convict and did not believe the Convict was the burglar. R. at 6. The Officer, however, was concerned that the burglar may have broken into the Convict’s house. R. at 6. The Officer asked to look around the house. R. at 6. The Convict claimed he normally kept his backdoor locked and had not heard or seen anything unusual. R. at 6. The Officer, however, wanted to ensure the burglar had not broken into the Convict’s house seeking refuge. R. at 6. The Convict did not consent to this sweep, but he also did not rescind his consent to the Officer’s presence in the house. R. at 6. The Officer then performed a brief protective sweep as a precautionary measure. R. at 6. When the Officer opened the kitchen door in search of intruders, he saw the semi-automatic handgun on the kitchen counter. R. at 6. The Convict was arrested and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). R. at 6. 3
Procedural History On October 1, 2011, the North Greene District Court denied the Convict’s motion to suppress. R. at 6. On October 15, 2011, the Convict entered a conditional guilty plea pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2), reserving the right to challenge the denial. R. at 6. On November 1, 2011, the district court sentenced the Convict to 180 months in prison. R. at 6. The Convict filed a timely notice of appeal, challenging his conviction and his sentence. R. at 6. The Thirteenth Circuit upheld the conviction, but reversed and remanded the case for resentencing. R. at 6. The Convict appealed and this Court granted certiorari. R. at 12. SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT The paramount purpose of Government is to protect its citizens from present and future danger. Protective sweeps and the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) serve this function. Protective sweeps dispel threats of present danger. The ACCA prevents threats of future danger. This Court should hold that (1) non-arrest protective sweeps are reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and (2) the possession of an unregistered sawed-off shotgun is a violent felony under the ACCA. Under Terry v. Ohio and its progeny, an officer may conduct a carefully limited search when he reasonably believes the search is necessary to secure the safety of officers or others nearby. Because the Fourth Amendment standard is reasonableness, safety overrides the warrant and probable cause requirements. For example, in Terry, this Court upheld an officer’s protective stop and frisk of a suspect’s outer clothing as reasonable. In Michigan v. Long, this Court expanded the safety doctrine to uphold a protective automobile search. Finally, in Maryland v. Buie, this Court upheld a protective sweep, incident to arrest, to protect officer safety. 4
Page 1 and 2: No. 13-201 ________________________
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS ii Page Questions
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued iv Page
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF AUTHORITIES-Continued vi P
Page 9 and 10: TABLE OF AUTHORITIES-Continued B. F
Page 11: investigators quickly determined th
Page 15 and 16: eckless conduct. Other felony offen
Page 17 and 18: The three seminal rulings governing
Page 19 and 20: Amendment intrusion was outweighed
Page 21 and 22: go on unlimited fishing expeditions
Page 23 and 24: had waited for a search warrant to
Page 25 and 26: The First Circuit found a protectiv
Page 27 and 28: determine whether an offense qualif
Page 29 and 30: eexamined the same issue in light o
Page 31 and 32: F.3d at 7 (commenting that Congress
Page 33 and 34: Subcommittee on Crime of the House
Page 35 and 36: only other listed offenses involvin
Page 37 and 38: The possession of an unregistered s
Page 39 and 40: U.S. Const. amend. IV APPENDIX Rele
Page 41 and 42: (h) to receive or possess a firearm
Page 43 and 44: term applies regardless of whether
Page 45: U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual

In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?