CA6: Nexus to home based on controlled buys doesn’t require constant visual surveillance

Controlled buys that included trips to defendant’s house was nexus. “Regardless of whether Sims was constantly within the detectives’ view, the affidavit establishes that for each controlled buy, Sims went straight to the buy location from the residence and returned immediately after the transaction, thereby supplying the required nexus with the residence. The mere possibility that detectives might not have had eyes on Sims for a brief period while Sims was headed towards or returning from the buy location does not take away from this common-sense conclusion. Overall, the affidavit undeniably provides ‘reasonable grounds’ to conclude that Sims had drugs stored at the residence.” United States v. Sims, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5208 (6th Cir. Mar. 4, 2025).

“Defendant’s unsupported assertion that he was an overnight guest at the Subject Residence ‘approximately’ five times in 2021 and he went there ‘frequently’ for meals … does not establish that he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the Subject Residence.” He raised an interesting, but ultimately unavailing, nexus argument, and the good faith exception would apply in any event. United States v. Yarbough, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40168 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 6, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Nexus, Probable cause, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.