United States v. Robert Fowler ( 2023 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 28 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50002
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No.
2:20-cr-00498-SB-AB-2
v.
ROBERT EUGENE FOWLER, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted March 10, 2023
Pasadena, California
Before: KLEINFELD, WATFORD, and COLLINS, Circuit Judges.
Robert Fowler appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to
suppress evidence of drug trafficking seized from his Toyota Camry. The district
court concluded that the good-faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s
exclusionary rule applied. Finding no error, we affirm.
The good-faith exception provides an exemption from the exclusionary rule
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
when “an officer acting with objective good faith has obtained a search warrant
from a judge or magistrate and acted within its scope.” United States v. Leon, 468
U.S. 897, 920 (1984). The minimum requirements of the good-faith exception are
not met when a warrant is “based on an affidavit that is so lacking in indicia of
probable cause that official belief in its existence is entirely unreasonable.” United
States v. Fowlie, 24 F.3d 1059, 1067 (9th Cir. 1994).
Here, the affidavit made a colorable argument for probable cause, which the
agents relied on in good faith in securing a warrant to search Fowler’s car. The
statement of probable cause connected Fowler and his car to known drug
traffickers. It documented that law enforcement officers had observed Fowler
driving a known drug trafficker in his Camry to a nearby motel shortly after that
known trafficker had conducted a suspected drug sale. It also stated that, on one
occasion in which Fowler drove one known trafficker (Brian Bridges) to meet with
another trafficker (Christina Neff) who emerged from an apartment building,
Fowler himself first exited the car and approached the building in an apparent
effort to find Neff. Fowler then drove around the block in an apparent effort to
locate Neff, and after Neff approached the car and spoke to Bridges, Fowler drove
away “at a high rate of speed.” The statement of probable cause also cited relevant
information concerning those known drug traffickers that was gained from the Los
Angeles Police Department’s investigations into drug trafficking in the Wilshire
2
and Hollywood areas and from Detective Braun’s experience and knowledge about
drug trafficking operations.
These facts are, at a minimum, “sufficient to create disagreement among
thoughtful and competent judges as to the existence of probable cause.” Id.(quoting United States v. Hove, 848 F.2d 137, 139 (9th Cir. 1988)). Accordingly,
the district court properly denied Fowler’s motion to suppress on the ground that
the good-faith exception applies here.
AFFIRMED.
3