Summary
This Fourth Circuit opinion reviews a defendant's appeal following a guilty plea for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court affirms the denial of the defendant's Fourth Amendment motion to suppress, finding the warrantless vehicle search justified under the search-incident-to-arrest exception. However, because the government concedes the district court miscalculated the defendant's criminal history score, leading to an erroneously high Sentencing Guidelines range, the court vacates the sentence and remands for resentencing.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the warrantless search of the Buick violated the Fourth Amendment.
- Whether differences between the oral pronouncement of supervised-release conditions and the written judgment constituted reversible error under United States v. Rogers.
- Whether the erroneous calculation of Turner's criminal-history score and advisory Guidelines range required correction on plain-error review.
Holdings
- A warrantless search of a vehicle incident to the arrest of a recent occupant is permissible under Arizona v. Gant when it is reasonable to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found in the vehicle. That standard requires less than probable cause, and it was satisfied here.
- A material discrepancy between the oral pronouncement of discretionary supervised-release conditions and the written judgment violates the rule announced in Rogers, but the minor wording differences here were not material and therefore did not constitute reversible error.
- The district court plainly erred by assigning a criminal-history point for Turner's 45-day sentence imposed when he was under 18 and more than five years before the instant offense. Because the error increased the advisory Guidelines range and affected substantial rights, the sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing.
Key quotations
“For all these reasons, we agree with the district court that Gant’s “reasonable to believe” standard can be satisfied with something less than probable cause.” (9)
“The Rogers rule is an important one, protecting the right of a defendant to be present when sentenced and facilitating sometimes meritorious objections to discretionary conditions of supervised release.” (14)
“We agree and, accordingly, vacate Turner’s sentence and remand so that he may be resentenced under a correctly calculated advisory sentencing range.” (16)
Factual background
Police investigated the reported theft of a handgun from Turner's brother and learned that Turner, a felon and gang member, allegedly had taken it. After a later carjacking report involving a handgun matching the stolen weapon, an officer encountered Turner shortly after a shots-fired call while Turner was seated in a black Buick. Turner was arrested on an outstanding warrant, frisked without discovery of a weapon, and placed in a patrol car; officers then searched the Buick and found the stolen firearm in the glove compartment.
Procedural history
The Middle District of North Carolina denied Turner's motion to suppress the firearm, concluding that the warrantless vehicle search was valid under the search-incident-to-arrest exception. Turner then pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court imposed 57 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release based on a Guidelines range of 46 to 57 months. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction, rejected the alleged Rogers error, vacated the sentence because the criminal-history score was miscalculated, and remanded for resentencing.
Remand instructions
Vacate Turner's sentence and remand for resentencing using a correctly calculated advisory Guidelines range. The district court may assess in the first instance any additional Guidelines issues, including potential relief under retroactive Amendment 821.