JOY FLOWERS CONTI, Chief District Judge.
Pending before the court is a motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of the residence of Jason T. Korey ("Korey" or "defendant") on April 17, 2014, (ECF No. 26), and a motion for discovery with respect to a search and seizure policy of the United States Probation Office ("USPO"), (ECF No. 27). On April 29, 2014, a federal grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania returned a one-count indictment charging Korey with possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, on or about April 17, 2014, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). (ECF No. 1.) On May 14, 2014, Korey pleaded not guilty to count one of the indictment. (ECF No. 17.) On October 9, 2014, Korey filed a motion to suppress evidence, (ECF No. 26), and a motion for discovery, (ECF No. 27). On November 6, 2014, the government filed an omnibus response to Korey's motions. (ECF No. 37.)
On November 24, 2014, the court held a hearing with respect to Korey's motion to suppress and motion for discovery.
On December 4, 2014, the government filed its supplemental brief with respect to Korey's discovery request. (ECF No. 38.) On December 29, 2014, Korey filed a response to the government's supplemental brief. (ECF No. 44.) On January 22, 2015, the parties filed their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. (ECF Nos. 46, 47.)
After considering the parties' submissions and the evidence presented at the suppression hearing, the court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to Korey's motion to supress:
1. In 2005, Korey in a separate federal criminal action, i.e.,
2. On May 31, 2013, the court in the 2005 case determined Korey violated conditions of his supervised release, revoked Korey's term of supervised release, sentenced him to a term of imprisonment of thirteen months, and a term of supervised release of twenty-four months. (Crim. Action No. 04-15, ECF No. 160.) The court imposed upon Korey several conditions of supervised release, including—but not limited to—the following conditions:
(Crim. Action No. 04-15, ECF Nos. 131, 160.)
3. White was assigned to supervise Korey while he served his two-year term of supervised release in the 2005 case. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 34.)
4. On January 13, 2014, an officer with the Baldwin Police Department pulled Korey over while he was driving his mother's vehicle, a 2002 green Chevy Cavalier, and issued him criminal summons for "fleeing or attempting to elude police officer" and "driving while operating privileges is suspended or revoked." (Gov't Ex. 1 at 5; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 35, 39.) The narrative signed by the reporting officer from the Baldwin Borough Police Department read, in part, as follows:
(Gov't Ex. 1 at 5.)
5. White received notice of Korey's encounter with the Baldwin Borough Police Department from the National Crime Information Center ("NCIC"). White learned from the NCIC that the Baldwin Borough Police Department "ran" Korey's name and date of birth. White conducted a criminal record search and learned the Baldwin Police Department charged Korey with "fleeing or attempting to elude police officer" and "driving while operating privileges is suspended or revoked." (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 35.) White obtained a copy of the police report with respect to the January 13, 2014, incident, and learned the police officer who stopped Korey found a large fixed blade knife on Korey's person. (
6. Upon learning about Korey's encounter with the Baldwin Police Department on January 13, 2014, White became concerned that Korey violated the following conditions of his supervised release: (1) the defendant shall not commit another federal, state, or local crime; and (2) the defendant shall not possess a firearm, ammunition, destructive device, or any other dangerous weapon. (
7. On March 9, 2014, officers from the City of Pittsburgh Bureau of Police responded to a call for "shots fired" placed by the owner of Mooney's Bar, who told dispatch that "he ran outside picked up a firearm went back in the bar then it sounded as if someone was trying to kick in the door of the business." (Gov't Ex. 2 at 2; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 37.) The owner of Mooney's Bar also told dispatch "that there was a white male wearing a red hoodie across the street that was possibly involved." (Gov't Ex. 2 at 2.)
8. A responding police officer encountered a man named Ryan Murtaugh ("Murtaugh"), who was wearing a red hoodie sweatshirt and blue jeans, standing outside the bar next to a vehicle, i.e., a 2002 green Chevy Cavalier, owned by Korey's mother. (Gov't Ex. 2 at 2; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 38.) The police report provides the following information with respect to the responding officer's encounter with Murtaugh:
(Gov't Ex. 2 at 2.)
9. An eyewitness provided an account of the shooting to two responding police officers. The police report provides the following information with respect to the eyewitness' account of the shooting:
(Gov't Ex. 2 at 3; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 37-39.)
10. White learned about the March 9, 2014, shooting from the "Pittsburgh Intelligence Police Bureau," which claimed Korey was involved in the incident. White also received the "investigative reports" which provided details about the incident. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 37.)
11. On March 10, 2014—the day after the shooting involving Mooney's bar—an officer with the Baldwin Borough Police Department stopped a 2003 white Cadillac Deville driven by Murtaugh because the officer suspected Murtaugh was driving under the influence ("DUI"). (Gov't Ex. 3; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 40.) Korey was a passenger in the 2003 white Cadillac Deville driven by Murtaugh when it was stopped. (Gov't Ex. 3 at 2; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 40.) The police officer conducted a search of the vehicle driven by Murtaugh and recovered from the trunk of the car a blue grocery bag containing two hypodermic needles, two empty stamp bags, alcohol prep pads and cotton balls. (Gov't Ex. 3 at 4.)
12. Murtaugh was charged via criminal summons for DUI. (Gov't Ex. 3 at 4.) The police report with respect to the March 10, 2014, incident indicates that following a hospital visit, the issuing police officer "transported [Murtaugh] to Koreys [sic] residence . . . where he [was] staying." (
13. White performed a background check on Murtaugh and learned he is "a convicted felon for possession of a firearm." (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 40.)
14. Upon learning about the shooting involving Mooney's Bar on March 9, 2014, and Murtaugh being charged with DUI on March 10, 2014, White became concerned that Korey violated the following conditions of his supervised release: (1) the defendant shall not associate with any persons engaged in criminal activity and shall not associate with any person convicted of a felony, unless granted permission to do so by the probation officer; (2) the defendant shall not frequent places where controlled substances are illegally sold, used, distributed, or administered; and (3) the defendant shall not possess a firearm, ammunition, destructive device, or any other dangerous weapon. (
15. On March 11, 2014—the day after Murtaugh was issued a criminal summons for DUI—Murtaugh contacted the Baldwin Borough Police Department. (Gov't Ex. 3 at 9; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 41-43.) Murtaugh told a police officer from the Baldwin Borough Police Department that prior to the DUI incident, he lived with Korey, but after Murtaugh was processed for the DUI, Korey told him not to come to his residence because Korey's mother "did not want him there." (Gov't Ex. 3 at 10.) On March 11, 2014, Murtaugh arranged to retrieve his belongings from Korey's residence. Korey agreed to gather Murtaugh's belongings and have them ready for Murtaugh when he arrived at the residence. Murtaugh reported to the Baldwin Borough Police Department that when he went to retrieve his belongings from Korey's residence, his prescription medication, i.e., "8 sublingual strips of suboxone and 20 gabapentin pills," and a one hundred-dollar bill, were missing. (
16. Upon learning about Murtaugh's report to the Baldwin Borough Police Department with respect to the missing prescription medication and money, White became concerned that there were prescription drugs at Korey's residence. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 43.)
17. On or about March 13, 2014, White requested permission from his supervisor, the chief probation officer, to search Korey's residence for evidence that Korey violated conditions of his supervised release. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 43.) White, in his request, informed his supervisor about Korey's criminal summons issued on January 13, 2014, the circumstances surrounding the shooting involving Mooney's Bar on March 9, 2014, and the circumstances surrounding Murtaugh's criminal summons for DUI on March 10, 2014. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 57-58.)
18. White's request to search Korey's residence for evidence that Korey violated conditions of his supervised release initially was not approved by the chief probation officer. (
19. Following White's initial request to search Korey's residence, White continued to receive information about Korey that he believed gave him reasonable suspicion to search Korey's residence for evidence that Korey violated conditions of his supervised release. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 43.)
20. On March 20, 2014, a Pennsylvania State Police Officer notified White that from December 2013, through March 2014, Korey was involved with a large sum of money at Rivers Casino. The police officer informed White about the following:
(Gov't Ex. 6 at 1-2; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 44-47.)
21. From January 2014, through March 2014, Korey reported to White that he was employed by All Steam Cleaning, earned $1,080 per month, and spent $500 per month paying for an attorney. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 45-46.) White ordered Korey to provide verification of his employment, i.e., a pay stub of his earnings. (
22. Comparing Korey's reported monthly income, i.e., approximately $580 after legal fees, to the amount of money Korey was involved with at Rivers Casino, caused White to be concerned about Korey's compliance with the conditions of his supervised release. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 46.)
23. On or about April 7, 2014, the Pleasant Hills Police Department issued Korey a criminal summons charging him with retail theft for attempting to steal $597.06 worth of merchandise from Kmart. (Gov't Ex. 4 at 1; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 47.)
24. Upon learning about Korey being charged with retail theft, White became concerned that Korey violated the condition of supervised release prohibiting him from committing another federal, state, or local crime. White was also concerned that Korey was receiving illicit income, i.e., receiving income from committing crimes. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 47.) White explained that he was concerned Korey was receiving illicit income because "[Korey] was participating in criminal activity and . . . there seemed to be a lifestyle inconsistency with the amount of money that he had at the casino." (
25. On or about April 14, 2014, an agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (the "ATF"), notified White that a confidential informant reported that Korey, who resides with his mother: (1) "has two different firearms hidden in his residence, a 9mm hidden behind a brick wall behind the house and a .40 caliber berretta hidden in a drop ceiling near the bathroom;" (2) "is known to rob `weak' drug dealers as a way to gain income;" (3) "hangs out at the Rivers Casino about 3 times a week depending on how much money he has;" and (4) "robbed a narcotics trafficker that goes by the street name `Less Nuts' for approximately 16 ounces for [sic] cocaine." (Gov't Ex. 5 at 1; H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 50-51.)
26. The ATF agent in the email also wrote that Korey "aka [sic] `lil J' [was] a known shooter in the area [and] currently resid[ed] with his mother." (Gov't Ex. 5.)
27. Following White's initial request to search Korey's residence, White continued to verbally update his supervisor about the additional information he received about Korey violating conditions of supervised release, including the information White received from the ATF agent informing White that Korey was "a known shooter in the area" and that a confidential informant reported—among other things—that Korey had two firearms in his residence. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 68, 75.)
28. On or about April 15, 2014, White's supervisor approved his request to search Korey's residence for evidence that Korey violated conditions of his supervised release. (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 68-69.)
29. From March 13, 2014, i.e., the date White initially requested permission from his supervisor to search Korey's residence, until on or about April 15, 2014, i.e., the date White received approval to conduct the search of Korey's residence, White and other USPO officers "conduct[ed] surveillance of [Korey's] residence, coordinate[d] with local law enforcement and other law enforcement to effect a search safely." (H.T. 11/24/14 (ECF No. 40) at 69; Gov't Ex. 6 at 1.)
30. On April 15, 2014, another probation officer with the USPO, Michael Howard ("Howard"), presented a Petition for Warrant or Show Cause Hearing for Offender Under Supervision (the "petition") in the 2005 case. (Crim. Action No. 04-15, ECF No. 163.) The petition advised the court about the following: (1) Korey's criminal summons for "fleeing or attempting to elude police officer" and "driving while operating privileges is suspended or revoked" issued on January 13, 2014; (2) Korey's criminal summons for retail theft issued on April 7, 2014; (3) the circumstances surrounding the March 9, 2014, shooting involving Mooney's Bar; (4) Korey's associations with Murtaugh; and (5) the circumstances surrounding Murtaugh's criminal summons for DUI on March 10, 2014. (Def.'s Ex. A (ECF No. 26-2) at 2-3.)
31. On April 17, 2014, the court as a result of the filing of the petition in the 2005 case issued a warrant for Korey's arrest. (Crim. Action 04-15, ECF Nos. 163.)
32. On the same day, White and other members of law enforcement searched Korey's residence for evidence of contraband or that Korey violated conditions of his supervised release. (Def.'s Ex. B at 1.) The following weapons and contraband were found and seized by the USPO as a result of the search:
(
33. Following the search of Korey's residence, Howard filed a Supplemental Petition for Warrant or Show Cause Hearing for Offender Under Supervision
34. Howard prepared a Special Response Team Post Search Report (the "post search report"). (Def.'s Ex. B.) In the post search report, the section entitled "Reasonable Suspicion" provides:
(Def.s Ex. B at 1.)
35. White testified that the information contained in the post search report under the section entitled "Reasonable Suspicion" was the same information listed in the presearch report
36. On April 29, 2014, a federal grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania returned a one-count indictment charging Korey possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, on or about April 17, 2014, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). (ECF No. 1.) The indictment charges Korey with knowingly possessing specific items seized during the April 17, 2014, search of his residence, i.e., "a firearm and ammunition, namely a .40 caliber Beretta pistol bearing serial number BEZ017605M; a Glock 9 millimeter magainze containing 15 rounds of ammunition; a 45 caliber Taurus magazine; 44 rounds of American Eagle 38 Special ammunition; and 43 rounds of 9x18 Colby ammunition." (ECF No. 1 at 1-2.)
37. Korey argues the items seized during the April 17, 2014, search of his residence, which form the basis of the indictment in this case, should be suppressed because the USPO did not have reasonable suspicion that he possessed contraband or evidence of a violation of a condition of supervision in his residence. (ECF Nos. 26, 47.)
1. As a general rule, the burden of proof is on the defendant who seeks to suppress evidence.
2. The Fourth Amendment provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." U.S. CONST. amend. IV.
3. The Fourth Amendment generally requires law enforcement to secure a warrant supported by probable cause before conducting a search.
4. Reasonable suspicion "is a less demanding standard than probable cause and requires a showing considerably less than preponderance of the evidence."
5. The court must look at the "`totality of the circumstances—the whole picture'" surrounding a case to determine whether a law enforcement officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct a warrantless search.
6. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has explained that "`[r]easonable suspicion must be based upon `specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion.'"
7. Reasonable suspicion may be based upon a law enforcement officer's personal observations or information supplied by another person.
8. Korey concedes that pursuant to the conditions of his supervised release with respect to the 2005 case, a probation officer could search his residence, among other places and things, "`based upon reasonable suspicion of contraband or evidence of a violation of a condition of supervision." (ECF No. 26 at 1 (quoting Crim. Action No. 04-15, ECF Nos. 131, 160).)
9. Accordingly, the relevant inquiry in this case is whether prior to searching Korey's residence on April 17, 2014, White had reasonable suspicion that the residence contained contraband or evidence of a violation of a condition of supervision.
10. The government argues White had reasonable suspicion to believe a search of Korey's residence would find evidence of Korey's: (1) possession of firearms; (2) illicit income earned form violations of local, state, or federal law; and (3) fraternization with a convicted felon, i.e., Murtaugh. Each of the government's contentions will be addressed below.
11. At the time White conducted the search of Korey's residence, he knew the following information with respect to Korey's alleged involvement with firearms:
12. Based upon the foregoing information, which was known to White prior to the April 17, 2014, search of Korey's residence, White had reasonable suspicion to believe evidence that Korey possessed a firearm—a violation of the law prohibiting a felon from possessing a firearm and Korey's conditions of release prohibiting the same—would be found in Korey's residence.
13. The January 13, 2014, incident during which Korey was issued two criminal summons showed that Korey previously drove his mother's 2002 green Chevy Cavalier, which was the same vehicle found on-scene by police during their investigation of the shooting involving Mooney's Bar. An eyewitness told the responding police officers that she was directly behind the vehicle, which belonged to Korey's mother, when she saw two occupants of the vehicle each stick their arm and a firearm out of the vehicle. Murtaugh told the police officers that he drove the vehicle, and Korey was a passenger in the vehicle. One firearm was recovered by the owner of Mooney's Bar, but the police reports do not indicate the whereabouts of the alleged second firearm. White at the time of the April 17, 2014, search knew Murtaugh—who previously was convicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm and associated in public with Korey—was living with Korey at the time of the shooting involving Mooney's Bar. Along with the foregoing information, White learned from an ATF agent that Korey was known as a "shooter" to the ATF and a confidential informant reported that there were two firearms in Korey's residence, and Korey was known to rob drug dealers. Considering all this information, i.e., the totality of the circumstances, White had specific and articulable facts, which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts gave him much more than a mere hunch that Korey had at least one firearm in his residence.
14. Korey sets forth a number of arguments in his submissions to support his position that White did not have reasonable suspicion that firearms would be found in a search of his residence. Korey's arguments, however, do not suffice to show the April 17, 2014, search of his residence was unreasonable.
15. Korey argues that with respect the shooting involving Mooney's Bar, he was not arrested, no charges were filed against him, and he was not on-scene following the alleged shooting. Police officers must have probable cause to arrest and charge an individual with a crime.
16. With respect to Korey not being on-scene following the shooting involving Mooney's Bar, whether he was on-scene or not, he was implicated in the shooting based upon the following information: Korey's mother's vehicle, which Korey drove on January 13, 2014, was found near the scene of the shooting; Murtaugh told police officers that prior to their arrival to the scene, he drove Korey's mother's vehicle, and Korey was a passenger in the vehicle; and an eyewitness told police officers that she saw two occupants of Korey's mother's vehicle each stick a firearm out of a window of the vehicle and fire an unknown amount of rounds into the street.
17. Korey argues that the email from the ATF agent "was insufficient to establish the reasonable suspicion necessary to authorize the search of Mr. Korey's residence" for the following reasons:
(ECF No. 47 at 16.)
18. With respect to Korey's first argument about the ATF agent email, i.e., White did not rely upon the email because it was not included in the post search report, White testified that he learned about the information contained in the ATF agent's email prior to the April 17, 2014, search, informed his supervisor about the information contained in the email prior to the April 17, 2014, search, and relied upon the information to form the basis of his reasonable suspicion to conduct the April 17, 2014, search of Korey's residence. Whether the information contained in that email was included in the post search report, which was filled out by Howard, does not cast significant doubt on White's testimony that he knew about the information and relied upon it to form the basis of his reasonable suspicion to search Korey's residence.
19. With respect to Korey's second argument, i.e., the reliability and validity of the email from the ATF agent is questionable because the government turned over the ATF agent email on November 24, 2014, the day of the suppression hearing in this case, Korey's counsel questioned White about the email during the hearing and did not elicit any testimony from White that calls into question the validity of the email the ATF agent sent to White. To the extent Korey questions the reliability of the information contained in the email, those arguments will be addressed below.
20. Korey's remaining arguments with respect to the email the ATF agent sent to White concern the reliability of the confidential informant who provided the information contained in the email. As discussed above, reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause.
21. Korey is correct that the probation office did not know the identity of the confidential source or his or her motivation in providing the information. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held, however, that "information received from other law enforcement officials during the course of an investigation is generally presumed to be reliable . . . [and] government agents should generally be able to presume that information received from a sister governmental agency is accurate."
22. In
23. Korey did not provide any information to the court that shows White acted in reckless disregard of the truth when he relied upon the information provided by the ATF agent. Korey did not present any evidence to the court to suggest there was a systemic failure on the ATF's part to produce accurate information upon request or that White's particular investigation into possibly inaccurate information should have given the officer an obvious reason to doubt the accuracy of the information; rather, much of the information provided by the confidential informant was supported by evidence already known to White at the time he received the ATF agent's email.
24. With respect to the information provided by the confidential informant that Korey had two firearms in his home, White knew from police reports that Korey was implicated in the shooting involving Mooney's Bar, and while an eyewitness said she saw two firearms used in the shooting, only one firearm was recovered from the scene of the shooting.
25. The information with respect to Korey frequenting Rivers Casino "about 3 times a week" is supported by the information White received from the state police officer reporting Korey's activities at Rivers Casino totaled approximately $10,000.
26. The information with respect to Korey robbing drug dealers as a way to gain income is not directly supported by any of the information known to White at the time he received the email from the ATF agent. In light of all the information White knew at the time he received the email from the ATF agent, including information that Korey did not verify his income, however, there was nothing about any of the information provided by the ATF agent that should have given White "an obvious reason to doubt the accuracy of the information" provided by the ATF agent.
27. Based upon the information known to White at the time he received the email from the ATF agent, it was not unreasonable for White to rely upon the information contained in the email to form the basis of his reasonable suspicion that a firearm would be found in a search of Korey's residence. Korey failed to show that the information contained in the email from the ATF agent "would have put a reasonable official on notice that further investigation was required."
28. Korey next argues that—other than the email White received from the ATF agent—there is no evidence connecting any alleged criminal activity by Korey to his residence. Firearms, however, "are . . . the type[] of evidence likely to be kept in a suspect's residence."
29. Korey argues that the incidents forming the basis of White's reasonable suspicion with respect to Korey's possession of a firearm in his home are remote in time to the day of the search—April 17, 2014. The shooting involving Mooney's bar occurred on March 9, 2014, and the search of Korey's residence occurred five weeks later on April 17, 2014. Even if five weeks was determined to be "remote" in time from the day of the search, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has recognized that "possession of weapons . . . is by its nature a continuous activity."
30. Based upon the foregoing, the government met its burden to show it is more likely than not that White's search of Korey's residence was supported by reasonable suspicion that a firearm would be found in the home. Korey's motion to suppress will, therefore, be denied.
31. The government argues White had reasonable suspicion that a search of Korey's residence would produce evidence of illicit income earned from Korey's violations of local, state, or federal law. The information known to White at the time of the search, i.e., Korey could not verify his income, was engaged in substantial gambling at Rivers Casino, was issued a criminal summons for retail theft, and was known by at least one source to rob drug dealers, supported the conclusion that Korey was obtaining illicit income. White, therefore, had reasonable suspicion that a search of Korey's residence may produce evidence that Korey was obtaining illicit income, i.e., property, cash or drugs that Korey might have stolen.
32. The government argues White had reasonable suspicion that a search of Korey's residence would produce evidence that Korey fraternized with Murtaugh, which was a violation of the condition of Korey's release to "not associate with any persons engaged in criminal activity and shall not associate with any person convicted of a felony, unless granted permission to do so by the probation officer." (Crim. Action No. 04-15, ECF Nos. 131, 160.) White at the time of the April 17, 2014, search had evidence, i.e., police reports from the shooting involving Mooney's Bar, Murtaugh's criminal summons for DUI, and Murtaugh's reporting that he lived at Korey's residence prior to March 10, 2014, and his prescription medication was missing, that Korey and Murtaugh, who was a convicted felon, fraternized inside and outside Korey's home. Based upon the foregoing information and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, White at the time of the April 17, 2014, search had reasonable suspicion that evidence of Murtaugh living at Korey's residence, i.e., the missing prescription medication, mail Murtaugh received at the home, or other items belonging to Murtaugh, would be found during a search of Korey's residence.
33. For all the reasons stated above, the motion to suppress must be denied.
Korey requests the government to disclose to him the USPO policy on search and seizures to "explor[e] the credibility of the government's representations regarding the claimed bases for the search[,]" but
There is no general right to pretrial discovery in the criminal context analogous to discovery in the civil context. Instead, criminal pretrial discovery primarily is governed by Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, as well as the government's obligations under
Under
Material must be both exculpatory to the accused and material in order for the prosecution to be required to disclose it under
The court conducted an in camera review of the USPO's search and seizure policy, and—mindful that Korey requests receipt of the USPO's search and seizure policy in order to attack the credibility of White—compared the USPO search and seizure policy to the testimony given by White at the suppression hearing in this case on November 24, 2014. Assuming White is a "crucial prosecution witness" because he initiated and conducted the search of Korey's residence during which the USPO seized the firearms and ammunition referred to in the indictment in this case, nothing contained in the USPO's search and seizure policy would alter the jury's judgment of White's credibility in such a way as to categorize the USPO's search and seizure policy as exculpatory information. Accordingly, the USPO's search and seizure policy is neither material to Korey's defense nor exculpatory. Korey's motion for discovery will, therefore, be denied.
Upon consideration of the parties' filings, and the suppression hearing held on November 24, 2014, including the arguments made by counsel, testimony of White, and other evidence introduced at the hearing, and in accordance with the findings of fact and conclusions of law filed herewith, Korey's motion to suppress (ECF No. 26) will be denied, and Korey's motion for discovery (ECF No. 27) will be denied.
An appropriate order will be entered.
