U.S. v. Price

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress firearm and ammunition that were seized by parole agents from his home without warrant. Defendant’s status as parolee reduced his privacy expectations, and defendant’s parole agreement allowed parole agents to conduct search based on “reasonable suspicion” as opposed to “probable cause.” Moreover, parole officers had reasonable cause to believe that defendant had recently purchased .40 caliber ammunition and rifle magazine, so as to support instant search of his home. Ct. rejected defendant’s “stalking horse” theory that instant search was subterfuge involving police criminal investigation in effort to avoid 4th Amendment warrant and probable cause requirements. Also, record supported defendant’s convictions on charges of possession of .40 caliber pistol and rifle, where record supported theory that defendant had constructively possessed said firearms due to his proximity to said firearms, as well as his statements and ammunition purchases. Record also supported Dist. Ct.’s sentencing enhancements for possession of multiple firearms, possession of stolen firearm (in spite of defendant’s claim that he was unaware of status of said firearm) and obstruction of justice based on finding that defendant committed perjury on material fact during trial concerning defendant’s possession of firearms.