United States of America v. TRACY DEVON THOMAS, AKA Baby 8, AKA Yachin French, AKA Jachin French Jr., AKA Lil C,…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TRACY DEVON THOMAS, AKA Baby 8,
AKA Yachin French, AKA Jachin French
Jr., AKA Lil C, AKA S-Man, AKA Tracy
Devon French Thomas, AKA Jachin Tracy,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-50382
D.C. No.
2:16-cr-00526-FMO-CR-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Fernando M. Olguin, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted January 11, 2019
Pasadena, California
Before: TASHIMA and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and ROBRENO,** District
Judge.
The district court properly admitted the gun and ammunition seized pursuant
to a warrant authorizing the search of Tracy Thomas’ apartment. The warrant was
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, United States District Judge for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.
FILED
JAN 17 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

Page 2 of 3
supported by probable cause. According to the warrant affidavit, the victims of the
drive-by shooting observed and reported the license plate number of the car used in
the shooting. Thomas was renting a car with that license plate number at the time
of the shooting, and the car was returned approximately two hours after the
shooting took place. Thomas had his own car and lived in the same metropolitan
area where the shooting occurred. These facts gave rise to a “fair probability” that
Thomas was involved in the shooting. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983).
The warrant affidavit also established probable cause to search the specified
apartment. The police determined that Thomas lived there by locating his car and
conducting surveillance outside of the apartment. Under the totality of the
circumstances, there was a fair probability that the firearm and other evidence
relating to the shooting would be found at Thomas’ apartment. See United States
v. Bowers, 534 F.2d 186, 190–92 (9th Cir. 1976). The passage of two weeks
between the shooting and the search did not undermine the existence of probable
cause. See id. at 192–93.
The district court properly admitted the statements that Thomas made at the
police station. Even assuming that Thomas’ arrest was unconstitutional, his
statements were admissible because they were taken while Thomas was in legal
custody and after he had waived his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436
(1966). See New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14, 19–20 (1990). Thomas’ continued

-- 2 of 3 --

Page 3 of 3
detention after the arrest was lawful because the police had probable cause to arrest
him for the shooting and for possessing the gun and ammunition found at his
apartment. See id. at 18.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --