USA v. Centeno

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
United States of America
v. 	Case No. 21-cr-56-1-SM
Opinion No. 2022 DNH 056
Jafet Centeno
O R D E R
Defendant moves to suppress evidence seized during a search
of his room in his mother's house, conducted pursuant to a
search warrant issued by a New Hampshire Superior Court Judge.
The warrant appears valid in all respects and seems to be fully
supported by the underlying affidavit.
Defendant's motion essentially challenges only the
information presented to the issuing magistrate related to the
identity of his residence — the place to be searched. 	He says
it was insufficient, as there were no observations of him
entering or leaving the residence, and only general references
to the police having "confirmed" his mother's home as his
residence based upon information gleaned from the Manchester
Police Department Database, and the TLO National Information
Database. 	That would probably have been sufficient to establish
the likelihood that defendant resided at his mother's home, but
Case 1:21-cr-00056-SM Document 33 Filed 04/20/22 Page 1 of 3

2
even that information was strengthened when it was confirmed by
the defendant himself. 	After he was briefly stopped on February
22, 2021, while driving a car registered to his mother's
address, defendant's name, date of birth and apparent address
were given or determined in some manner during the encounter —
his address was the same as his mother's.
Police officers were investigating reports of thefts from
cars in the neighborhood in which defendant had been seen
cruising during the early morning hours. 	Defendant's car fit
the description of one that had been driven by the theft
suspects. 	The warrant's supporting affidavit notes that
defendant was identified at the time as "Centeno, Jafet DOB:
[REDACTED], 1997, Address: 70 West River Drive" [his mothers'
address]. 	It is not clear whether that information was obtained
from defendant's driver's license, or whether he provided it, or
it was simply the address of registration. 	But any ambiguity
was largely resolved by defendant's own statements: 	"Centeno
stated that he was locked out of his mother's house and was
attempting to stay at his cousin's girlfriend's who lived at 15
Court Side Way."
The issuing magistrate certainly could have reasonably
concluded that defendant probably resided at the address
Case 1:21-cr-00056-SM Document 33 Filed 04/20/22 Page 2 of 3

3
indicated by the police databases, and where the car he was
driving was registered, and where he said he had been locked out
of, necessitating his seeking to stay at his cousin's
girlfriend's supposed residence that evening.
Nothing in the record suggests that defendant did not
reside at his mother's home, or that he (credibly) resided
exclusively elsewhere, or that the stolen firearms at issue were
not likely to be found at his residence. 	The supporting
affidavit adequately established defendant's residence, and the
police were entitled to rely upon the issued warrant to conduct
the search. 	See e.g. United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897
(1984).
Conclusion
The motion to suppress evidence (doc. no. 23) is denied.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________
Steven J. McAuliffe
United States District Judge
April 20, 2022
cc: 	Anna Z. Krasinski, AUSA
Donald A. Kennedy, Esq.
U.S. Probation
U.S. Marshal
Case 1:21-cr-00056-SM Document 33 Filed 04/20/22 Page 3 of 3