## Facts

- Pine Lawn, Missouri police responded to a 911 call at a residence on February 15, 2005.
- A woman, Cole, answered the door, invited officers inside, and led an officer to a bedroom and then the kitchen; Hilliard was present and did not object.
- Cole retrieved a Taurus .38 revolver from under a bed and a baggie of crack cocaine from the kitchen, stating both belonged to Hilliard.
- Hilliard was arrested, advised of his Miranda rights, and later admitted he purchased the firearm “off the street.”
- In August 2005, officers surveilled the same residence after suspecting drug activity and observed quick transactions consistent with drug dealing.
- Officers obtained a search warrant and executed it on August 17, 2005, detaining Hilliard outside.
- While detained, Hilliard said he had a handgun under his bed pillow and stated “every man should have a gun in his house.”
- Officers found a .357 Magnum revolver under a pillow in Hilliard’s bedroom and approximately 237 grams of crack cocaine in the kitchen down the hall, along with valuables and indicators of cash proceeds.
- At the station, Hilliard gave a written statement that he possessed the crack cocaine “to pay bills” and possessed the firearm for “protection,” acknowledging he bought it “off the street” because he was a convicted felon.
- A jury convicted Hilliard of two drug-trafficking counts, two felon-in-possession counts, and one § 924(c) count, acquitting him on a second § 924(c) count; the district court imposed a 270-month sentence and five years of supervised release.

## Issues

1. Whether evidence and statements from the February 15, 2005 entry should have been suppressed because Cole lacked authority to consent or because Hilliard’s presence negated consent.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that, on August 17, 2005, Hilliard possessed the .357 revolver “in furtherance of” a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
3. Whether the district court erred at sentencing by determining drug quantity based on judicial fact-finding rather than jury findings beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentence.
- The court held the February 15 entry and resulting seizures were lawful because officers reasonably relied on Cole’s consent and Hilliard made no express contemporaneous objection.
- The court held the § 924(c) conviction was supported by sufficient evidence of a nexus between the firearm and drug trafficking, including accessibility, proximity to a large quantity of crack cocaine, and Hilliard’s admissions that the gun was for protection.
- The court held the district court could determine drug quantity by a preponderance of the evidence when calculating advisory Sentencing Guidelines, so long as the sentence remained within statutory limits.

## Legal Principles

- A warrantless entry is permissible when officers obtain voluntary consent from a person with actual or apparent authority over the premises.
- When a co-occupant consents, the consent is generally effective unless another present occupant expressly and contemporaneously objects.
- For 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), mere simultaneous possession of drugs and a firearm is insufficient; the government must show the firearm furthered, advanced, or helped forward drug trafficking, supported by facts such as proximity, accessibility, strategic placement, and purpose.
- Under an advisory Guidelines regime, a sentencing court may find drug quantity by a preponderance of the evidence for Guidelines calculations, provided the sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum authorized by the verdict.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the denial of suppression because officers reasonably relied on a co-occupant’s consent without objection, found sufficient evidence that the firearm was kept to protect drugs and proceeds for § 924(c) liability, and approved judicial drug-quantity findings for advisory Guidelines sentencing within statutory bounds.


United States v. Hilliard, 490 F.3d 635 (8th Cir. 2007)