US v. Paopao, No. 05-10653 (10-10-06). Its a gamble when you're a felon and you have a gun. It becomes a high stakes gamble when you're in an illicit gambling room. Suspects were committing robberies of poker rooms. The police got a tip that the suspects were in fact in a gambling room, and a robbery might be in progress. The police went to the apartment. The defendant left, saw the police, and went back in, where he dropped a bag he was carrying behind a sofa. The police subsequently did a protective sweep of the place, and saw in the unzipped bag what he thought was a gun and jewelry. Defendant was charged as a felon in possession. He argued that the search was illegal. The 9th found that he didn't have standing, since the apartment was not his residence, and he didn't have an expectation of privacy. On the merits, the 9th would find that the sweep was reasonable given the circumstances, the concern about another robber hiding in the rooms, and the place, and entered the apartment.

US v. Mosley, No. 05-30488 (10-11-06). Defendant had a car accident. He appeared nervous, sweating, and under the influence. He was also wanted on a warrant. The police arrested him, and while the car was being towed, "found" a plastic lid of a coffee grinder outside that appeared to be have mixture of meth and marijuana. It tested positive, and not just for espresso. Using this information, a search warrant was gotten to find the coffee grinder in the apartment. Well, the search for the daily grind also yielded a treasure trove of drugs and many guns. Charged with "possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking,' defendant argued that the guns were not in furtherance of the drug deals. The 9th held that the argument missed the mark, because a jury could find that the loaded weapons, types of weapons, and presence of guns facilitated drug transactions. The 9th declines to make a checklist or articulate factors, but would rather use a totality of circumstances approach.