Mackenzie Becker was involved in a road-rage incident on February 13, 2023, where he allegedly discharged a firearm at another driver. Following the incident, Denver Police Detective Gerald Sloan investigated and identified Becker as the driver through DMV records matching a license plate to a green Saab, which was later found abandoned. Sloan also identified a second address for Becker, a house on West Iliff Lane, through law enforcement databases. Surveillance confirmed that the gray Saab involved in the incident was parked at this house and that Becker was observed washing the car and entering the residence. Based on this, officers obtained a search warrant for the West Iliff Lane house and the vehicle. During the search, they discovered firearms, ammunition, and drugs, leading to Becker's indictment. Becker moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the warrant lacked probable cause because the affidavit did not sufficiently link the road-rage incident to the specific address searched. He also challenged the constitutionality of the federal statute prohibiting felons from possessing firearms.
The court addressed two primary issues. First, regarding probable cause, the court analyzed whether the affidavit provided a substantial basis to believe evidence of the crime would be found at the West Iliff Lane address. The court rejected Becker's argument that the affidavit relied on vague police summaries, distinguishing the case from United States v. Roach. The court noted that the affidavit described specific investigative methods, including database checks and surveillance, which corroborated the link between Becker and the residence. Officers observed the specific vehicle used in the crime parked at the house and saw Becker washing it, establishing a fair probability that the house was his residence. Second, the court addressed the nexus between the crime and the location. Becker argued that the three-week delay between the shooting and the warrant application meant the firearm could have been disposed of. The court disagreed, citing the nature of firearms as evidence that is typically kept at a residence for extended periods. The court noted that it is unlikely a felon would dispose of a firearm given the difficulty of acquiring a replacement, and the presence of the vehicle at the address further supported the inference. The court held that the affidavit provided sufficient additional evidence linking the crime to the home. Second, the court addressed Becker's Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The court noted that Becker conceded this argument was foreclosed by the Tenth Circuit's precedent in United States v. Vincent, which upheld the statute's constitutionality. The court declined to consider Becker's as-applied challenge because it was raised perfunctorily without developed argumentation.
The decision affirms Becker's convictions for firearms and drug offenses. It reinforces the Tenth Circuit's standard for probable cause in search warrant affidavits involving firearms, clarifying that a three-week delay does not automatically render probable cause stale when the item sought is a weapon likely to be kept at a residence. The ruling also confirms that challenges to the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) remain foreclosed by existing circuit precedent unless the Supreme Court issues a new ruling that changes the landscape.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download