Defendant ran a portable toilet business, and his home was on the property. The EPA suspected him of dumping into a river, and they secured a warrant for the business. They also searched his bedroom, and the EPA had no authority to search the residence. \u201cIn this case, the Court finds the EPA warrant did not authorize the search of Butler’s residence. The EPA warrant failed to meaningfully disclose and seek permission to search Butler’s residence. Moreover, the EPA warrant did not authorize officers to search for evidence of violations of the Clean Water Act in Butler’s bedroom. Additionally, the Court finds that the government is not saved by the good faith exception to the warrant requirement. The government has failed to demonstrate that officers had an objectively reasonable good faith basis for searching Butler’s residence.\u201d United States v. Butler, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21443 (D.Utah Feb. 22, 2016).<\/p>\n
The USMJ\u2019s credibility determination that the defendant was more believable than the officers is supported by the evidence as a whole in the record. The recommendation to grant the motion to suppress is adopted. United States v. Boatrite, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20785 (N.D.W.Va. Feb. 22, 2016),* R&R 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20786 (N.D. W.Va. Feb. 2, 2016).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant ran a portable toilet business, and his home was on the property. The EPA suspected him of dumping into a river, and they secured a warrant for the business. They also searched his bedroom, and the EPA had no … Continue reading