United States of America v. Miguel Baron

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MIGUEL BARON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-50401
D.C. No. 3:14-cr-02917-AJB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted May 2, 2016
Pasadena, California
Before: PREGERSON, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Miguel Baron appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress
evidence seized during a warrantless probation search. We affirm. On balance, the
search of Baron’s truck was reasonable.1
FILED
MAY 19 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1 Baron’s residence was also searched. However, because no evidence from
that search was used against Baron, it is not relevant to our analysis.

-- 1 of 3 --

The probation search of Baron’s truck did not violate the Fourth
Amendment. In determining whether the search was reasonable, “we balance, ‘on
the one hand, the degree to which [the search] intrudes upon an individual’s
privacy and, on the other, the degree to which [the search] is needed for the
promotion of legitimate governmental interests.’” United States v. Lara, 815 F.3d
605, 610 (9th Cir. 2016) (alterations in original) (quoting United States v. Knights,
534 U.S. 112, 119 (2001)).
Baron’s privacy interest was minimal. First, as a probationer, Baron’s
privacy interest was “significantly diminished.” See Knights, 534 U.S. at 119-20.
Second, Baron’s vehicle, where the gun was found, was subject to “a reduced
expectation of privacy.” See California v. Carney, 471 U.S. 386, 393 (1985).
Third, Baron’s probation terms “unambiguously informed” him that his vehicle
was subject to search. See Knights, 534 U.S. at 119.
The government’s interest, on the other hand, was significant. “Probationary
searches advance at least two related government interests—combating recidivism
and helping probationers integrate back into the community.” Lara, 815 F.3d at
612. “These are important interests whose strength in a particular case varies
depending on the degree to which the government has a specific reason to suspect
that a particular probationer is reoffending or otherwise jeopardizing his
2

-- 2 of 3 --

reintegration into the community.” Id. Here, the government had a “specific
reason” to make the search, because Baron’s name had come up several times prior
to the search in connection with either shootings or thefts. See id.
AFFIRMED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --