U.S. v. Schmitt

In prosecution on unlawful possession of firearm charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress rifle found in plain view in defendant’s basement during execution of arrest warrant. While defendant argued that instant seizure was improper because it had occurred after defendant had been arrested on first floor of his home, seizure was proper, where rifle was discovered during protective sweep of defendant’s home. Fact that rifle was in locked basement did to require different result. Ct. also did not err in admitting certain evidence of defendant’s uncharged drug dealing/possession, where defendant had contested issue of his possession of rifle, and where such evidence was relevant on issue of defendant’s motive to possess instant rifle, which govt. claimed was used to support his drug dealing activities.