In United States v. Barnes, --- F.3d ---, No. 16-30203 (9th Cir. 2018), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the defendant’s conviction for felon in possession despite an invalid arrest warrant (which led to the gun).
The Court began with the general principle that “judges may not rely on a prosecutor’s complaint alone to find probable cause.” In this case, however, there was nothing in the record demonstrating the judge relied on something other than the prosecutor’s complaint.
However, under the good faith exception, “evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a subsequently invalidated . . . warrant” is not subject to suppression.” There are, however, exceptions to the exception.
The defendant argued the good faith exception was inapplicable because the judge wholly abandoned her judicial role by relying solely on the prosecutor’s complaint to find probable cause.
The Court agreed in part, “join[ing] our sister circuits in concluding that a defendant may show judicial abandonment through any one of the following ways: (1) the magistrate was biased against the defendant or otherwise personally interested in issuing the warrant; (2) the magistrate functionally occupied a different, non-neutral role while making the probable cause determination; or (3) the magistrate failed to review the requisite affidavits or materials prior to making a probable cause determination.”
But the exclusionary rule applies only if the issuing judge abandoned his or her judicial role and law enforcement officers knew or should have known of the abandonment. Here, that second condition was not met. Thus, no suppression.
