Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Jones

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

November 6, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GARY OWEN JONES, Defendant-Appellant.

          Argued: September 20, 2019

          Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:18-cr-00023-GMG-RWT-1)

         ARGUED:

          Aaron David Moss, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant.

          Lara Kay Omps-Botteicher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

         ON BRIEF:

          Kristen M. Leddy, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant.

          William J. Powell, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

          Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

          BARBARA MILANO KEENAN, Circuit Judge.

         Gary Jones entered a conditional guilty plea to being a felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). On appeal, he challenges the denial of his motion to suppress various ammunition and ammunition components seized from his residence pursuant to a search warrant. The warrant, which authorized a search for evidence of "threats of terrorist acts" (terrorist threats) under W.Va. Code § 61-6-24, was based on a series of threats that Jones made online against members of law enforcement.

         Jones argues that the search warrant was invalid for two reasons. First, he asserts that the warrant lacked probable cause on its face, because his statements did not constitute terrorist threats under West Virginia law, and because the affidavit submitted by police to obtain the warrant (the warrant affidavit) failed to establish the required nexus between his residence and the evidence sought. Second, Jones alternatively maintains that even if the warrant was facially valid, the magistrate's probable cause determination was undermined by the omission of several statements from the warrant affidavit. Jones claims that he made a substantial preliminary showing that these omissions were both intentional and material, and thus separately challenges the district court's denial of his request for an evidentiary hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978).

         Upon our review, we conclude that the search warrant was supported by probable cause, and that the alleged omissions in the warrant affidavit were immaterial to the magistrate's probable cause determination. We therefore affirm the district court's judgment.

         I.

         We recount the facts presented to the state magistrate who issued the challenged warrant. Owens ex rel. Owens v. Lott, 372 F.3d 267, 277 (4th Cir. 2004). Because the district court denied Jones' suppression motion, we state the evidence in the light most favorable to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.