United States v. Ralston

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOHN LEE RALSTON, Defendant.

No. 21-cr-76-CJW

United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division

March 23, 2022

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS

Mark A. Roberts United States Magistrate Judge Northern District of Iowa

I. INTRODUCTION 2

II. FINDINGS OF FACT 3

A. Whether the First Warrant Contained a Substantial Basis for Concluding that Probable Cause Existed to Issue the Warrant ..........................11

1. The Parties' Arguments ..................................................13

2. Analysis .....................................................................16

B. The Leon Good Faith Exception ...............................................26

C. Fruits of the Poisonous Tree ....................................................32

1. Whether Evidence Seized Pursuant to the Second Warrant Must be Suppressed as Fruit of the Poisonous Tree ...........................33

a. The Warrant .......................................................33

b. Analysis .............................................................34

2. Whether Evidence Seized Pursuant to the Third Warrant Must be Suppressed as Fruit of the Poisonous Tree ...........................36

a. The Warrant .......................................................36

b. Analysis .............................................................38

D. Recommendation ...................................................................39

III. CONCLUSION .............................................................................40

I. INTRODUCTION

On December 14, 2021, the Grand Jury charged Defendant John Lee Ralston with one count of Possession of Firearms by a Prohibited Person in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sections 922(g)(1), 922(g)(3), 922(g)(9), and 924(a)(2). (Doc. 2.)

The matters before the Court are Defendant's Motion to Suppress and Supplemental Motion to Suppress. (Docs. 21 and 28.) The Government timely filed a response. (Doc. 27.) Defendant timely filed a reply. (Doc. 29.) The Honorable Charles J. Williams, United States District Court Judge, referred the motion to me for a Report and Recommendation. I held a hearing on Thursday, March 3, 2022. (Doc. 30.)

At the hearing, the following Government exhibits were admitted without objection:

1. An application for a search warrant with supporting affidavit and attachments, a search warrant, and a warrant return (“the first search warrant”). (Gov. Ex. 1);

2. An application for a search warrant with supporting affidavit and attachments, a search warrant, and a warrant return (“the second search warrant”). (Gov. Ex. 2); and 3. An application for a search warrant with supporting affidavit and attachments, a search warrant, and a warrant return (“the third search warrant”). (Gov. Ex. 3).

Defendant filed an Inventory of Items to be Suppressed and a Supplemental Inventory of Evidence to be Suppressed. (Docs. 21-1 and 28-1.) Defendant's Exhibit A was admitted without objection: Exhibit containing the first, second, and third search warrants and supporting evidence. (Def. Ex. A).

The Government called one witness: Sergeant Investigator Tim Smith of the Jones County, Iowa Sheriff's Department (“Deputy Smith”). For the following reasons, I respectfully recommend that the District Court grant Defendant's Motions to Suppress.

II. FINDINGS OF FACT

This case involves three search warrants issued and executed at two different times on January 15, 2021. The dispute before the Court principally arises out of the first search of Defendant's residence located on real property in rural Jones County, Iowa (“the property.”) The property is bisected by Bear Creek Road with structures on either side. Prior to the search, investigators had identified Colton Varty as a suspect in multiple burglaries in the area and suspected he might have secreted items he had stolen on the property. The property contained two residences: a mobile home on the north side of the road and a single-family residence on the south side of the road. At the time of the search, Mr. Varty appears to have been residing in (or at least “frequenting”) the mobile home while Defendant was known to be residing in the single-family home. The problem presented is whether the affidavit supported a search of Defendant's residence. To address this issue, I find it helpful to catalog the nature of evidence Deputy Smith marshaled in support of his first warrant application:

1. The affidavit is replete with information regarding Mr Varty's involvement in burglaries in Jones County, Iowa from on or about December 16, 2020 to December 25, 2020. (Gov. Ex. 1 at 3-5.) There seems to be no dispute that these burglaries created probable cause to search the trailer where law enforcement believed he resided. However, law enforcement had no knowledge that Defendant was in any way involved in these burglaries and extensive details relating to each of them do not need to be recited here.

2. Mr. Varty was suspected of breaking into unoccupied buildings and construction trailers and stealing various items, mostly power tools, and related equipment. (Id. at 3-5, 36, 44.) The warrant application did not contain evidence supporting Defendant's involvement in these break-ins and/or thefts. Relevant to the issues at bar, the affidavit discloses law enforcement's suspicion that Defendant could be involved in possession of or “fencing” stolen property from the thefts.

3. Witnesses and law enforcement reported seeing, variously, a “smaller SUV, possibly silver in color, comparable to a Ford Escape, ” “a Jeep Liberty (possibly green in color), ” Mr. Varty's vehicle, and Mr. Varty in and around the locations of the burglaries. (Id. at 3-4.) Some of these sightings were in the dark early morning hours, which are the hours when law enforcement believes the burglaries/thefts also occurred. (Id.) Defendant was not alleged to have been seen in these vehicles or at these sites.

4. Mr. Varty is the registered owner of a 2003 blue Jeep Liberty. (Id. at 4.)^[1], ^[2] 5. At 4:20 a.m. on December 26, 2020, Mr. Varty was involved in a traffic stop in the area where the burglaries occurred. (Id. at 5.) The officer conducting the stop noticed that Mr. Varty was dressed in all camouflage clothing and was “extremely nervous.” (Id.) The officer observed a black duffle bag in the back of the Jeep that appeared full with the zipper partly opened. Inside the duffle, he saw what he believed was a DeWalt tool. (Id.) The officer also noticed three Dewalt products on the back driver's seat, including a DeWalt angle grinder with an attached grinding wheel. (Id.) Mr. Varty told the officer he was not gainfully employed, but that the tools belonged to “his boss, ” whose telephone number he did not know. (Id.)

6. Deputy Smith was aware that battery-powered tools like the DeWalt tools possessed by Mr. Varty on December 26 are utilized as burglary tools^[3] and that grinders are commonly utilized to gain access to structures and vehicles to commit thefts within. (Id.) Deputy Smith also knew a grinder was used to access trailers during a construction site burglary on December 25. (Id. at 45.) Several tools were taken during this burglary. (Id. at 44.)

7. In late December 2020, a confidential source (“CS”) stated that Mr. Varty offered to sell him tools and indicated that the tools were stolen (“hot”). (Id. at 5.) The CS arranged a controlled purchase between Mr. Varty and Chief Deputy Eckhardt. Mr. Varty arrived in his Jeep. Chief Deputy Eckhardt asked where the “job” was, meaning where the theft had occurred, and Mr. Varty said it was “close to home” and the name of the person was “Industry Builder, ” indicating that was the name on the side of the trailers. (Id.) Chief Deputy Eckhardt purchased 17 tools from Mr. Varty for $150. (Id.; Smith Hr'g Test.)^[4] The owner of Integrity Builders verified that several of the tools recovered in the undercover purchase were stolen from his company trailers during the December 25 construction site burglary. (Id.) Deputy Smith believed that Mr. Varty was still in possession of more tools from this burglary. (Id.)

8. On January 12, 2021, Chief Deputy Eckhardt received a photo from the CS depicting tools that Mr. Varty attempted to sell to the CS. (Id. at 6.) In the Facebook Messenger photo, the tools are “clearly laid out on a carpeted floor, believed to be a residence. There is also a stain on the floor which may be later identified executing [a] search warrant which would be relevant for criminal prosecution.” (Id.) In the photo, the person displaying the goods (presumably Mr. Varty) is wearing brown suede shoes similar to moccasins that have “unique” stitching. (Id.)

9. The affidavit in support of the first search warrant also stated that the sheriff's office knew cutting tools had been used to gain access in some of the burglaries and that the Iowa crime lab can match tool marks from suspected burglary tools used to cut locks at a burglary site and listed various cutting tools, including grinders. (Id. at 7.)

10.Deputy Smith knew the following facts about the property and Defendant's and Mr. Varty's relationship to it:

I aware [sic] the thefts and burglaries mentioned in this affidavit have all occurred within several miles of John Ralston's residence where we believe Varty and Ralston are residing. We are aware based on sources utilized in this affidavit Varty has been utilizing his vehicles to likely scope out other properties to perpetrate his crimes. It is also possible, given the fact that several of the known locations are uninhabited, Varty may

...