U.S. v. Garrett

In prosecution on drug distribution charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress his inculpatory statements made after his arrest, where defendant asserted that police lacked probable cause to arrest him. Police had probable cause to arrest defendant where, prior to his arrest: (1) police intercepted several telephone calls indicating that defendant and another individual were setting up drug deal; (2) on day of said deal, police observed another individual deliver plastic bag to defendant; and (3) another individual called defendant minutes after defendant received plastic bag to ask if defendant was satisfied with drugs. Record also supported police claim that defendant gave police consent to search his cell phone. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in sentencing defendant to 190-month term of incarceration, where Dist. Ct. failed to expressly state drug quantity it attributed to defendant or identify evidence it found reliable when making any drug quantity calculation.