## Facts

- Richard Owen Brown was charged with, and convicted of, conspiracy to import cocaine, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, and attempt to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 963 and 846.
- The government’s case included physical evidence taken from a car owned by Brown’s girlfriend.
- Brown challenged the admissibility of that evidence in the district court by moving to suppress it.
- Brown argued on appeal that the district court erred by denying suppression of the physical evidence seized from his girlfriend’s car.
- Brown appealed his convictions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

## Issues

1. Did the district court err in denying Brown’s motion to suppress physical evidence seized from his girlfriend’s car, such that the evidence should have been excluded under the Fourth Amendment?

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Brown’s motion to suppress.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Brown’s convictions for the cocaine conspiracies and attempt offenses charged under 21 U.S.C. §§ 963 and 846.

## Legal Principles

- On appeal from a suppression ruling, appellate courts commonly review factual findings for clear error and review the application of Fourth Amendment law to those facts de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the party that prevailed below.
- The Fourth Amendment generally requires a warrant for searches and seizures, but evidence obtained without a warrant may be admitted if the search or seizure falls within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement.
- A motion to suppress is the procedural vehicle by which a criminal defendant seeks exclusion of evidence allegedly obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- When a defendant challenges the admissibility of physical evidence, the reviewing court focuses on whether the challenged police conduct was constitutionally reasonable under the governing Fourth Amendment standards.

## Conclusion

United States v. Brown, 203 Fed.Appx. 997 (11th Cir. 2006), is an Eleventh Circuit criminal appeal in which Richard Owen Brown sought suppression of physical evidence seized from his girlfriend’s car and argued the district court wrongly denied his suppression motion. The Eleventh Circuit rejected Brown’s suppression challenge, affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress, and affirmed Brown’s convictions for conspiracy to import cocaine, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, and attempt to possess with intent to distribute cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 963 and 846.


United States v. Brown, 203 Fed.Appx. 997 (2006)