United States v. Jeremiah Taylor ( 2023 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-1107
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Jeremiah Taylor
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: December 12, 2022
Filed: January 13, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
A jury found Jeremiah Taylor guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
Taylor appeals arguing it was plain error to admit evidence collected during a traffic
stop. We affirm.
Taylor was stopped for driving a car with stolen plates. During the stop an
officer saw a gun through the car window. Knowing Taylor was a felon, the officer
placed Taylor in custody and searched the car, including the locked trunk. Taylor did
not move to suppress any evidence before the trial and did not object to any evidence
during the trial. Taylor now asserts it was plain error for the district court1 to admit
evidence collected from the trunk of the car.
Defendants are required to bring motions to suppress evidence before trial “if
the basis for the motion is then reasonably available[.]” Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3).
Taylor was aware that the government intended to use the evidence and any possible
grounds for suppression before trial. Untimely motions can be reviewed “if the party
shows good cause.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(c)(3). No explanation for the delay or good
cause was given, therefore “we need not consider the merits” of the claim. United
States v. Anderson, 783 F.3d 727, 741 (8th Cir. 2015).
Even if we were to assume a showing of good cause, the issue would be
reviewed for plain-error. United States v. Navarette, 996 F.3d 870, 875 (8th Cir.
2021). It was not error to admit evidence found in the trunk. “[A] police officer who
has lawfully made a roadside stop of a vehicle may search the passenger compartment
and trunk of that vehicle if probable cause exists to believe that contraband or
evidence of criminal activity is located inside the vehicle.” United States v. Walker,
840 F.3d 477, 483 (8th Cir. 2016). Given the firearm and stolen plates it was
reasonable to believe a search of the trunk would yield additional evidence.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgement of the district court.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Stephen R. Clark, then United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri, now Chief Judge.
-2-