United States v. Watson

In United States v. Watson, No. 23-60501 (5th Cir. June 28, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress a warrantless search of his house. At the time, Watson was on state probation, and his probation officer (accompanied by police) conducted a home visit based on a tip that Watson had drugs there.

Watson moved to suppress that evidence, arguing that the tip was not reliable so could not create reasonable suspicion to justify the search. He also argued that the probation officer’s statement that she was conducting a home visit “was a subterfuge to get Watson to consent to a criminal investigatory search.”

The search was permissible, however, because under the terms of Watson’s probation, the officer could conduct a home visit “even without reasonable suspicion that Watson was engaging in criminal activity.” And the officer’s subjective motive was “irrelevant under the Fourth Amendment.” See Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398, 404 (2006). Finally, even if the police officers violated their internal policies by joining in the search, that violation would be “irrelevant to whether the conduct violated the Fourth Amendment.” See United States v. Thomas, 997 F.3d 603, 616 (5th Cir. 2021).