United States of America v. Clyde Turaine Brand

Greensboro, North Carolina criminal defense lawyer represented the defendant charged with drug and firearm felonies.



Following his indictment on federal drug and firearm charges, Clyde Turaine Brand

moved to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant issued by a state court

judge. He argued that the affidavit supporting the warrant application failed to establish

probable cause for the search and, further, that the law enforcement officers who conducted

the search could not have relied on the warrant in good faith. The district court denied the

motion, and Brand was later convicted at trial. Brand now appeals, challenging only the

resolution of his motion to suppress.



* * *



Where probable cause is lacking, the usual remedy is suppression of the

evidence obtained from the search. United States v. Oscar-Torres, 507 F.3d 224, 227 (4th

Cir. 2007). However, "[u]nder Leon's 'good faith' exception to the suppression remedy

for a Fourth Amendment violation, evidence will not be suppressed if it is obtained by

police officers in objectively reasonable reliance on a search warrant, even if that warrant

later is determined to be invalid.” United States v. Blakeney, 949 F.3d 851, 861 (4th Cir.

2020) (citing United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 922-23 (1984)). But the good faith

exception will not apply "when the judicial officer [who issued the warrant] wholly

abandoned his role as a neutral and detached decision maker and served merely as a 'rubber

stamp' for the police,” or "when the affidavit supporting the warrant was so lacking in

Affirmed