USA v. Miguel McSwain

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________

No. 18-15258
________________________

D.C. Docket No. 2:18-cr-00020-JES-MRM-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

MIGUEL MCSWAIN,

Defendant - Appellee.
________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(August 26, 2020)
Before WILSON, JILL PRYOR, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Case: 18-15258 Date Filed: 08/26/2020 Page: 1 of 2

2

In this interlocutory appeal from the district court’s order granting in part and
denying in part the defendant, Miguel McSwain’s (“McSwain”), motion to suppress
evidence, the government argues that the district court erred in finding that the police
officers lacked probable cause to arrest McSwain prior to conducting a concededly
unconstitutional “knock and talk.” We review a ruling on a motion to suppress under
a mixed standard, reviewing factual findings for clear error and the application of
the law to the facts de novo. See United States v. Holloway, 290 F.3d 1331, 1334
(11th Cir. 2002). Moreover, where a district court grants a motion to suppress, we
view the record in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, here, McSwain.
Id. Give these principles, we agree with the district court that the police officers did
not have probable cause to arrest McSwain because they could not, prior to and
without the benefit of the constitutional violation—the improper “knock and talk,”
identify McSwain. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order granting in part
and denying in part McSwain’s motion to suppress.
AFFIRMED

Case: 18-15258 Date Filed: 08/26/2020 Page: 2 of 2