Criminal Practice – Search & Seizure – Search Warrant – Drug Sale – Police Body Cameras

We find no error in the district court’s determination that probable cause existed to support the search of the residence at 604 Hammond Drive. Given the totality of the circumstances, which included a confidential informant’s controlled purchase of narcotics at the residence as well as evidence of a drug overdose occurring there the next day, the district court did not clearly err by finding a reasonable probability that drugs were being sold and used at the residence.

We further discern no error in the district court’s conclusions that the warrant was sufficiently particular in describing the location to be searched, and that the probable cause backing the search warrant was not stale when there was only a six-day delay in executing the warrant and the crime was for ongoing distribution of narcotics.

We affirm the district court’s denial of defendants’ motions to suppress and to dismiss.

We also reject defendants’ arguments related to the officers’ failure to activate their body-worn cameras during the execution of the search because defendants proffer no supporting legal authority connecting a violation of law enforcement’s body-worn camera policy, standing alone, with the remedy of suppression of evidence or dismissal of the charges.

United States v. Jackson (Lawyers Weekly No. 003-018-23, 5 pp.) (Per Curiam) No. 21-4703. Appealed from U.S.D.C. at Florence, S.C. (Bryan Harwell, C.J.) John Ervin and James Hoffmeyer for appellants; Lauren Hummel for appellee. United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (unpublished)