United States Tenth Circuit

In a prosecution for a drug-related offense, denial of a motion to suppress evidence is affirmed where: 1) a search warrant for a house was lawful even though the affidavit for the warrant provided no direct evidence of criminal conduct at the house because, if law-enforcement officers have probable cause to believe that a person is a supplier of illicit drugs, then the officers have probable cause to search the person's home for such contraband and evidence; 2) officers executing a search warrant of a home may detain persons they encounter standing by a vehicle in the home's driveway; 3) in Oklahoma, if such a person flees the officers after being ordered to get down, the officers have probable cause to arrest him for violation of a statute prohibiting obstruction of an officer performing his duties; 4) officers may search the person of one who is apprehended after such flight, even though (a) the apprehended person is not formally arrested until the search of the home has been completed; and (b) the formal arrest is not for the offense of obstructing an officer; and 5) the district court did not err in any challenged procedural rulings related to the suppression hearing.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/10/2009
• Published 02/11/2009

Judges

• HARTZ, Circuit Judge., Before HARTZ, HOLLOWAY, and O'BRIEN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• William D. Lunn, Tulsa, OK, for Defendant-Appellant., Jeffrey A. Gallant, Assistant United States Attorney, (David E. O'Meilia, United States Attorney, with him on the brief), for Plaintiff-Appellee.