United States v. Douglas

Douglas · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · January 22, 2026 · No. 23-3399

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Ryan Douglas’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from searches of a residence and an iPhone. Although the court viewed the probable-cause basis for both warrants as weak, it held that the officers’ reliance on the warrants was objectively reasonable under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The court therefore affirmed the district court’s ruling.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Writing for the Court
Circuit Judge Pryor; Circuit Judge Jackson-Akiwumi; Circuit Judge Lee
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decision date
January 22, 2026
Docket number
23-3399
Procedural posture
Appeal from the denial of a motion to suppress evidence seized during searches of a residence and a cell phone; defendant entered a conditional guilty plea and appealed the suppression ruling.
Standard of review
For a warrant-based suppression ruling, historical facts are reviewed for clear error, while the legal conclusions and probable-cause determination receive no deference; when the district court simply reviews the warrant affidavit, the appellate court gives great deference to the issuing judge's probable-cause determination. The applicability of the good-faith exception is reviewed de novo.
Precedential value
published precedential opinion
Parties
Ryan Douglas v. United States of America
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

fourth amendmentprobable causewarrant requirementexclusionary rulesuppression of evidence

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawappellate procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the affidavit supporting the warrant to search 1726 N. 16th Street established probable cause to believe evidence of drug crimes would be found there.
  2. Whether the affidavit supporting the warrant to search Douglas's iPhone established probable cause to believe evidence of drug crimes would be found on that phone.
  3. Whether the Leon good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied to the officers' execution of either warrant even if probable cause was lacking.

Holdings

  1. Even assuming the residential search warrant lacked probable cause, suppression was unwarranted because Douglas failed to rebut the presumption that officers acted in good faith when they relied on the warrant.
  2. Even assuming the iPhone warrant lacked probable cause, suppression was unwarranted because the affidavit was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause that the officers' reliance on the warrant was entirely unreasonable.
  3. The district court properly denied the motion to suppress because the evidence from both searches was admissible under the Leon good-faith exception.

Key quotations

But this rule has exceptions, including the Leon good-faith exception, which provides that suppression is not warranted when police officers who executed the warrant relied in good faith on the issuing judge’s decision of probable cause. (6)
But we do not resolve the issue. The officers who searched 1726 N. 16th Street secured a warrant, so we presume they acted in good faith and thus any evidence they discovered is admissible under Leon’s good-faith exception. (9)
While thin, the affidavit here was not “so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable.” (11)

Factual background

Law enforcement received information from multiple confidential informants that Douglas was selling methamphetamine and cocaine and conducted several controlled buys involving Douglas or a black BMW associated with him. During the final controlled buy, Douglas carried items into 1726 N. 16th Street before completing the drug transaction and then returned to the house, which officers searched under an Illinois warrant. Officers seized cash, including buy money, plastic baggies, digital scales, and inositol powder. They later obtained a warrant to search an iPhone found in Douglas's vehicle during a traffic stop; the search revealed text messages related to drug sales.

Procedural history

A federal grand jury indicted Douglas for distribution of methamphetamine. The district court denied his motion to suppress, adopting a magistrate judge's recommendation that the warrants were supported by probable cause and, alternatively, that the officers acted in good-faith reliance on the warrants. Douglas entered a conditional guilty plea, was sentenced to 84 months' imprisonment, and appealed the suppression ruling.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…