United States v. Lamon David Simmons

United States v. Simmons, 129 F.4th 382 (6th Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · February 24, 2025 · No. 24-1057

Summary

This Sixth Circuit opinion addresses a defendant's appeal of a district court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant. The court applied the "continual-and-ongoing-operations theory," finding that the warrant affidavit established probable cause to search the defendant's primary residence based on reliable informant tips, multiple controlled buys, and surveillance confirming his ongoing drug trafficking activities. Concluding that the affidavit sufficiently linked the residence to the criminal activity, the appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Nalbandian; Thapar; Ritz
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
February 24, 2025
Docket number
24-1057
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, No. 1:22‑cr‑00177‑1, denying Simmons’s motion to suppress.
Standard of review
Mixed standard of review: factual findings reviewed for clear error, legal conclusions de novo.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Lamon David Simmons v. United States
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

fourth amendmentsearch and seizureprobable causecriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the warrant affidavit established probable cause to search Simmons’s Weatherwood home.

Holdings

  1. The Court affirmed the district court’s denial of the motion to suppress, finding that the affidavit provided a substantial basis and a sufficient nexus between the residence and Simmons’s ongoing drug trafficking.

Key quotations

Under the Fourth Amendment “no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” U.S. Const. amend. IV. (6)
The warrant affidavit plainly went beyond naked assumptions or boilerplate language. (14)

Factual background

Simmons was a known cocaine dealer who operated out of two residences. Over eight months, a confidential informant made multiple controlled buys, and police conducted extensive surveillance linking Simmons to the Weatherwood home, which was his primary residence and listed on his federal probation paperwork.

Procedural history

The district court denied Simmons’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his Weatherwood residence, finding probable cause under the continual‑and‑ongoing‑operations theory. Simmons appealed, arguing the warrant lacked a nexus between his home and drug activity.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…