United States v. Kenneth Becker ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 22-1042
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Kenneth Dean Becker
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
    ____________
    Submitted: December 12, 2022
    Filed: December 27, 2022
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Kenneth Dean Becker entered a conditional guilty plea for conspiracy to
    distribute and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. He reserved the
    right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress. We affirm the judgment of the
    district court.1
    Officers executed a search warrant at Becker’s residence. Becker argues there
    was a lack of probable cause, officers violated procedural requirements under
    Nebraska law, and statements he made after the arrest were fruits of a poisonous tree.
    We review factual findings on the denial of motion to suppress for clear error and
    legal conclusions de novo. United States v. Thurmond, 
    782 F.3d 1042
    , 1044 (8th Cir.
    2015).
    Probable cause for the search warrant existed. A cooperating witness told
    police that drug activity was occurring at a residence in Omaha. Investigators
    monitored a controlled buy between the cooperating witness and an individual at the
    residence. The evidence from the monitoring of the controlled buy demonstrated “a
    fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime” was in the residence. 
    Id.
    Although the affidavit did not specify the cooperating witness’s background, the buy
    was recorded with video and audio making the credibility issue largely immaterial.
    Next, even if a technical violation of Nebraska law occurred when signing the
    warrant that is not a basis for suppressing the evidence. United States v. Howard, 
    532 F.3d 755
    , 760 (8th Cir. 2008) (the Fourth Amendment, not state law, determines the
    admissibility of a search offered in a federal prosecution).2
    We affirm the judgment of the district court.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, United States District Judge for the District
    of Nebraska.
    2
    The pro se motion to amend the record is denied on the same grounds.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1042

Filed Date: 12/27/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/27/2022