Summary
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the denial of Ryan Neal Montgomery’s motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of his residence. The court held that the district court did not clearly err in crediting government witnesses who testified that the warrant was executed at or after 6:00 a.m., as required by the warrant and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the search violated the Fourth Amendment or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 because the warrant was executed before the warrant's authorized start time of 6:00 a.m.
- Whether the district court clearly erred in crediting the government's witnesses over Montgomery's family members concerning the time the warrant was executed.
- Whether alleged metadata errors and typographical errors in investigative reports established clear error in the district court's factual finding.
Holdings
- The suppression motion was properly denied because the record supported the district court's finding that the warrant was executed at or after 6:00 a.m., in accordance with the warrant.
- The district court did not clearly err in finding that the warrant was executed at or after 6:00 a.m. and in crediting the law-enforcement witnesses over Montgomery's family members.
- The alleged metadata and typographical errors were inconsequential and did not establish clear error.
Key quotations
“To succeed on a motion to suppress evidence for a violation of Rule 41, a defendant must show: (1) the violation is of constitutional magnitude; (2) the defendant is prejudiced in that the search would not have taken place or would not have been as intrusive; or (3) there is evidence of an intentional and deliberate or reckless disregard for that rule.” (at 2)
“Such a credibility finding is almost never a clear error “unless there is extrinsic evidence that contradicts the witness’s story or the story is so internally inconsistent or implausible on its face that a reasonable fact-finder would not credit it.”” (at 3)
“Assessments of witness credibility are “the province of the trial court,”” (at 4)
Factual background
A state magistrate judge issued a warrant authorizing a search of Montgomery's residence and specifying daytime execution between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Officers executed the warrant the next day and seized electronic devices and digital evidence containing child pornography. At the suppression hearing, five government witnesses testified that the search began after 6:00 a.m., while Montgomery's parents and sister testified that it began before 6:00 a.m. The district court credited the government witnesses, relying in part on inconsistencies in the defense testimony and evidence that family members had discussed and aligned their accounts.
Procedural history
A grand jury charged Montgomery with conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute and receive child pornography. The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri denied his suppression motion after a hearing at which witnesses gave conflicting testimony about whether officers executed the warrant before or after 6:00 a.m. Montgomery then entered a conditional guilty plea to conspiracy to advertise child pornography; the government dismissed the second count, and the district court imposed a 255-month sentence. The Eighth Circuit affirmed.